Matthew 16

Matthew 16:1

Jerome: (Chapter XVI—Verse 1 and following) And the Pharisees and Sadducees came to him and tested him, asking him to show them a sign from heaven. But he answered and said to them: When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red’; and in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but you cannot discern the signs of the times. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet. This is not found in most codices: it is clear that from the arrangement and stability of the elements, both fair and rainy days can be predicted. However, the scribes and Pharisees, who seemed to be experts in the law, could not understand the advent of the Savior from the prophecy of the prophets. — Commentary on Matthew

Theophylact of Ohrid: Although the Pharisees and Sadducees were at odds over their teachings, they conspired together against Christ. They ask for a sign from heaven, such as making the sun or the moon stand still, as they believed that signs on earth were by demonic power and by Beelzebub. But they were mindless not to remember that even Moses in Egypt did many signs on the earth and that the fire from heaven which descended on Job’s flocks was from the devil. So, then, not all things from heaven are of God and neither are all things on the earth of the demons.

Matthew 16:2

Jerome: This is not found in many codices. The meaning is clear from the order and harmony of the elements. Both fair and rainy days can be forecast. But the scribes and Pharisees, who were viewed as doctors of the law, could not discern the coming of the Savior from what the prophets had predicted. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.16.3

Theodore of Mopsuestia: He exposes the rashness of their question, saying, “You regard the air as moving according to a certain order, so that by means of signs you are able to predict when the weather will be fair and when stormy. But in the case of miracles you recognize no order at all. You do not recognize any occasions on which doing or not doing wonders is appropriate. You assume that such a thing happens completely without order and without any reason.” — FRAGMENT 89

Matthew 16:4

Chromatius of Aquileia: Just as that whale was not able to digest Jonah nor was able to keep him alive inside himself for long, so too voracious Death assuredly received the Lord. But since he was not able to keep him alive and in custody inside himself, Death regurgitated him on the third day, just as the whale had regurgitated Jonah. For Death, though accustomed always to eat and digest the dead, was nauseated and vomited out the Lord alive. Truly he was not able to digest him, for he was a rock—as the apostle says: “Moreover, Christ was a rock.” And indeed the whale gulped and expelled only Jonah. But Death in ingesting the Lord cast out not that very one alone but many with him. For we read that many corpses of the holy had risen up with the Lord. — TRACTATE ON Matthew 54.3

Hilary of Poitiers: But he descended from the sky and established for these an earthly sign that he might preserve among them a conviction of bodily humility, saying that the sign was to be given by Jonah. The Lord compares himself by means of like appearance with this one whom he had dispatched to Nineveh to accomplish the coming suffering for the proclamation of repentance. Indeed, Jonah was thrown from the ship by furiously raging winds and was devoured by the whale. After the space of three days he was cast out alive, not retained by the monster. He was not digested as food, but contrary to the nature of the human body, he escaped whole and unharmed into the open air. He prefigured the Lord. Therefore Jesus demonstrated that this sign of his own power had been divinely constituted, thus proclaiming in himself the forgiveness of sins through repentance. For he was soon to be cast out of Jerusalem and the synagogue by the blast of unclean spirits and by the power of Pontius Pilate. — Commentary on Matthew 16.2-3

Origen of Alexandria: Now he called them evil because their wicked deeds had made them evil people (evil because of deliberate wickedness) and adulterous because when the Pharisees and Sadducees left their metaphoric spouse, the true word, they committed adultery, with falsehood and the law of sin.Assume there are two laws: the law of our bodies, which is in conflict with the law of our mind. We might say then that the law of the mind (that is, the law of the Spirit) is the husband to whom the soul was betrothed by God as wife according to the Scripture; a wife is married to a man by God. But the other law is a seducer of the soul and as such is called “adulterous.” — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.4

Theophylact of Ohrid: He reproves them for their request, the purpose of which was only to test, and He calls them hypocrites, saying, “As it is with the phenomena of the sky where the sign of a storm differs from the sign of calm weather, and one who sees the sign of a storm would not expect calm weather, nor would one seeing the sign of calm weather expect a storm, so too must you think about Me. For this time of My appearing differs from that which is to come. Now there is need for signs on earth, but signs in heaven are reserved for that time when the sun will be extinguished, the moon will be hidden, and the heavens will be changed.”

. He calls them “a wicked generation” for tempting Him, and “adulterous” for deserting God and going over to the devil’s side. Although they asked for a sign from heaven, He gives only the sign of Jonah, which is, that for three days He will be in the belly of the great whale of death, and then He will rise. Yet you might say that this sign too is from heaven, for at His death the sun was darkened and all creation was changed. Mark the words “there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah.” It was for them that the signs were given, that is, the signs took place for their sakes, yet they did not believe. This is why He left them as incurable and departed.

Matthew 16:5

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (non occ.) As the Lord had left the Pharisees on account of their unbelief, so now He teaches His disciples to be on their guard against their doctrine; whence it follows, And when His disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.

(ord.) As much as to say; Why do ye think that I spake of earthly bread, for which ye ought not to have a thought, having beheld Me of so little make such abundant overplus?

(interlin.) As much as to say, Do ye not understand the mystery, nor remember the miracle? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Observe, we do not read here as in other places, that He sent the multitudes away and departed; but because the error of unbelief held the minds of the presumptuous, it is said that He left them.

Herein the Apostles are admonished not to be partakers in the doctrine of the Jews; for the works of the Law were established to produce faith, and to prefigure the things that were to follow; and they on whose times truth itself had chanced should look for no further types of truth; lest the teaching of the Pharisees, which knew not of Christ, should stay the effect of Gospel truth. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For he that takes heed of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, does not observe the precepts of the Law and of the letter, and neglects the traditions of men that he may do the commandments of God. This is the leaven of which the Apostle speaks, A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. (1 Cor. 5:6.) By every means also we should avoid that leaven which Marcion, Valentinus, and all the heretics had. For the nature of leaven is such, that when mixed with flour, that which seemed a little increases to a large quantity, and brings the whole mixture to its own flavour. Thus heretical doctrine if it have cast but a small spark into your breast, in a short time a mighty flame is raised, and drives the whole temper of the man along with it.

How had they no bread, seeing that as soon as they had filled seven baskets they entered into the boat, and came into the parts of Magedan? There they hear that they ought to take heed of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. But the Scripture is witness that they had forgotten to take the baskets with them.

Thus He takes this occasion to instruct them what is meant by the five loaves and the seven loaves, the five thousand and the four thousand, who were fed in the desert. For if the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees signified not earthly food, but corrupt traditions and heretical dogmas, why should not the food with which the people of God is nourished signify the true and uncorrupt doctrine? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 5.) And leaving them, he went away, and when his disciples had come across the sea, they forgot to take bread. He said to them: Leaving behind the scribes and Pharisees, to whom he had said, An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign, and a sign will not be given to it, except the sign of Jonah the prophet, he went over the sea correctly, and he followed the peoples of the Gentiles. But what the sign of Jonah means, has already been said above. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Why did He not say plainly, Take heed of the doctrine of the Pharisees? Because He would remind them of those things that had been done in the multiplication of the loaves, knowing them to be forgetful. To have given them this charge at once bluntly would have seemed unreasonable; but to find fault with them on occasion furnished by themselves prepared the way for the charge; therefore it is that the Evangelist brings forward their thoughts; But they thought within themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.

Because the disciples still grovelled about Jewish observances, the Lord sharply rebukes them for the benefit of all; whence it follows, But Jesus knowing their thoughts said unto them, O ye of little faith, why consider ye among yourselves because ye have no bread?

This He does that He may put away from them all care for food. But why did He not reprove them, when they said, Whence should we have so much bread in the wilderness? for that seemed a more fitting occasion. He did not blame them at that time that He might not seem to be by that urged on to do miracles, and He was unwilling to find fault with them before the people. Also there was more reason in the charge, when after two miracles of multiplication of loaves, they had anxiety about food. Observe with what mildness He rebukes them; He makes an excuse in answer Himself, saying, Do ye not yet understand, nor remember the five loaves?

By this calling to mind what was past, and rousing their attention to what was to come.

But that you may learn what force Christ’s reproof had upon His disciples, and how it roused their sluggish spirit, hear what says the Evangelist; Then they understood how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees; yet He had not interpreted this to them. This instruction of the Lord them drew them away from Jewish observances, and made them attentive instead of careless, and raised them out of their little faith, that whenever they should seem to have but little provision of bread they should have no fear about food, but should despise all those things. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: “And when His disciples,” so it is said, “were come to the other side, they forgot to take bread. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.”

And why said He not plainly, Beware of their teaching? His will is to remind them of what had been done, for He knew they had forgotten. But for accusing them at once there seemed to be no reasonable ground, but to take the occasion from themselves, and so to reprove them, would make the charge admissible. “And why did He not then reprove them, when they said, ‘Whence should we have so many loaves in the wilderness?’ for it seemed a good time then to say what He says here.” That He might not seem to rush hastily on the miracle. And besides, He would not blame them before the multitude, nor seek honor in their presence. And now too the accusation had greater reason, for that after repetition of the miracle they were so minded.

Wherefore also He works another miracle, and then and not till then He reproves; I mean, He brings forward what they were reasoning in their hearts. But what were their reasonings? “Because,” so it is said, “we have taken no bread.” For as yet they were full of trepidation about the purifications of the Jews, and the observances of meats.

Wherefore on all accounts He attacks them even with severity, saying, “Why reason ye in yourselves, O ye of little faith, because ye have brought no bread? Perceive ye not yet, neither understand? Have ye your heart hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? Having ears, hear ye not? Do ye not remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?”

Seest thou intense displeasure? For nowhere else doth He appear to have so rebuked them. Wherefore then doth He so? In order again to cast out their prejudice about the meats. I mean that with this view, whereas then He had only said, “Perceive ye not, neither understand?” in this place, and with a strong rebuke, He saith, “O ye of little faith.”

For not everywhere is lenity a good thing. And as He used to allow them freedom of speech, so doth He also reprove, by this variety providing for their salvation. And mark thou at once His reproof, how strong, and His mildness. For all but excusing Himself to them for His severe reproofs to them, He saith, “Do ye not yet consider the five loaves, and how many baskets ye took up; and the seven loaves, and how many baskets ye took up?” And to this end He sets down also the numbers, as well of the persons fed as of the fragments, at once both bringing them to recollection of the past, and making them more attentive to the future.

And to teach thee how great the power of His reproof, and how it roused up their slumbering mind, hear what saith the evangelist. For Jesus having said no more, but having reproved them, and added this only, “How is it that ye do not understand, that I spake it not to you concerning bread that ye should beware, but of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees;” He subjoined, saying, “Then understood they that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees,” although He had not uttered that interpretation.

See how much good His reproof wrought. For it both led them away from the Jewish observances, and when they were remiss, made them more heedful, and delivered them from want of faith; so that they were not afraid nor in alarm, if at any time they seemed to have few loaves; nor were they careful about famine, but despised all these things. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 53

Origen of Alexandria: The bread that they had before they crossed the lake was no longer of any use to them when they reached the other side. They needed one kind of bread before they crossed and a different kind afterward. They forgot to take any loaves with them because they were careless about carrying bread. The disciples of Jesus had also crossed to another side. They had passed from the material to the spiritual, from the sensory to the intellectual. This is why Jesus said to them after the crossing, be careful and be on your guard.The Pharisees and Sadducees offered a different dough of teaching, a truly ancient yeast restricted to the bare letter and therefore not free from evil. Jesus does not want his disciples to eat of it any longer. Instead, he mixed a new spiritual dough when he himself offered to any who would abandon the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees and come to him, the living bread which came down from heaven and gives life to the world. Anyone intending no longer to use the yeast and dough of the Pharisees and Sadducees’ teaching must first “be careful.” He must “be on guard” that he will not use the old leaven either accidentally or due to shortages. So Jesus tells his disciples first, “be careful,” and second, “be on your guard.” — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.5

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): They were bound to their Master with so great affection, that they were unwilling to part from Him for even a moment of time. And herein it should be observed how far they were from any longing for delicacies, when they took so small care for necessaries, that they had even forgotten to take bread, without which human weakness cannot support itself. He said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees; and of the Sadducees. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 16:6

Hilary of Poitiers: The apostles are ordered to watch out for the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. They are warned not to be involved in the disputes of the Jews. The works of the law are now to be viewed in the light of faith. They are forewarned that they, into whose time and age the truth had appeared incarnate, should judge nothing except which lies within the position of hope in likeness of the truth that is revealed. They are warned against allowing the doctrine of the Pharisees, who are unaware of Christ, to corrupt the effectiveness of the truth of the gospel. — Commentary on Matthew 16.3

Jerome: (Verses 6, 7.) Watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. But they were discussing among themselves, saying, ‘We did not bring any bread.’ He who avoids the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees does not observe the precepts of the Law and the teachings of men, neglecting the traditions in order to fulfill God’s commandment. — Commentary on Matthew

Theophylact of Ohrid: Just as leaven is both sour and old, so too the sour teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees, with its moldering traditions of the elders, ate away at souls. And just as leaven is a mixture of water and flour, so the teaching of the Pharisees is a mixture of their speech and their corrupted life. He did not say openly to them, “Beware of the teaching of the Pharisees,” so that He might remind them of the signs done with the loaves.

Matthew 16:7

Origen of Alexandria: After Jesus said this, the disciples thought to themselves (not aloud but in their hearts), “We did not bring bread.” Then they said something else, like “If we had bread, then we wouldn’t need the yeast from the Pharisees and Sadducees, but since we don’t have bread, we are at risk of taking their yeast. The Savior does not want us to return to their tutelage, so he told us ‘be careful and be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.’ ” Or they reasoned similar things.But Jesus, seeing into their hearts and hearing their inner arguments, reproves them as the Shepherd of the heart because they did not understand nor remember the bread which they had received from him. Because of what they had received, even when they appeared to lack bread, they did not need the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12:5

Matthew 16:8

Jerome: (Verses 8 and following.) But Jesus, being aware of this, said to them: Why are you discussing among yourselves, O you of little faith, that you have no bread? Do you still not understand or remember the five loaves for the five thousand men, and how many baskets you took up? Nor the seven loaves for the four thousand men, and how many baskets you took up? How is it that you do not understand that I did not speak to you about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. By occasion of the precept, which the Savior had commanded, saying: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, He teaches them what the five loaves and the seven signify: the five thousand men, and the four thousand, who were fed in the wilderness. Although the greatness of the miracles is clear, yet something else is shown in spiritual understanding. For if the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees signifies not bodily bread, but perverse traditions and heretical doctrines, why do the foods, with which the people of God are nourished, not signify the true and complete teaching? Let someone ask and say: How is it that they did not have bread, who, when seven baskets were filled immediately, they got into the boat and came to the region of Magadan; and there the sailors hear that they should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees? But the Scripture testifies that they forgot to take bread with them. This is the leaven that the Apostle speaks of; A little leaven leavens the whole lump (I Cor. V, 6). Marcion and Valentinus and all heretics had this kind of leaven, which is to be avoided in every way. This fermentation has the power that if it is mixed with flour, which seemed small, it grows into something greater, and attracts the entire mixture to its flavor ((or conversion)) : and so also heretical doctrine, if it has thrown even a small spark into your heart, in a short time it grows into a great flame, and draws the entire possession of the person to itself. Finally, it follows: Then they understood that he did not say to beware of leavened bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. — Commentary on Matthew

Matthew 16:11

Origen of Alexandria: Some were distracted by the use of bread and yeast. In order to clarify and enlighten them in a still symbolic way that he was not speaking about literal bread but about yeast as representing teaching, Jesus adds, “How is it that you do not understand that I was not talking to you about bread? Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” Even though he still had not exposed the literal meaning of his words but continued as before, the disciples would have understood the Savior as referring to the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees as leaven.When Jesus said “beware of the yeast,” the disciples understood that he did not tell them to watch out for bread but instead for the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. You, of course, are aware that whenever yeast is used in the law or in the Scripture which follows the law, it refers to teaching. Perhaps then yeast should not be burnt on an altar. Prayers should not have the form of teachings but should be only supplications for good things from God. Now, someone might ask, based on what has been said about the disciples crossing over to the other side, how can anyone who has reached the other side be rebuked as a person with little faith, not yet understanding or remembering what Jesus did? It is not difficult, I think, to answer this. That which has only a part will be done away with before that which is perfect. Little faith is all the faith we can have. Accordingly, we who know in part do not yet fully understand or remember. Therefore we are not able to achieve a mind sufficient and capable of attaining the magnitude and nature of such speculations. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.6

Matthew 16:12

Jerome: This was a favorable opportunity for instruction which was ordered by the Savior. He said, “Beware the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” He taught them what the five loaves and seven that had nourished five thousand and four thousand men in the desert signified. He showed that there is a spiritual understanding underlying these events, even if the import of the sign is clear. For if the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees indicated not physical bread but twisted narratives and heretical teaching, then might not also the food by which the people of God were nourished signify the true and complete doctrine?Someone might inquire, “How is it that they do not have the loaves? For they immediately boarded the boat after the seven baskets had been filled.” But the Scripture testifies to the fact that they had forgotten to take food with them. Remember the leaven about which even the apostle speaks when he writes, “A little leaven spoils the whole dough.” The sort of leaven of which he speaks is something like the kind that Marcion and Valentinus and all heretics exhibited. It is to be avoided by all means. Leaven has this power, that, if mixed with flour, that which seemed small would grow into something larger and draw to its own essence the whole loaf. So too with heretical doctrine, if it tosses even a tiny spark into your heart, in a short time a huge flame grows beneath and draws to itself a person’s entire substance. It was then that they finally understood that he had not meant them to beware simply of the leaven of bread but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.16.6-12

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But that you may learn what force Christ’s reproof had upon His disciples, and how it roused their sluggish spirit, hear what says the Evangelist; Then they understood how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees; yet He had not interpreted this to them. This instruction of the Lord them drew them away from Jewish observances, and made them attentive instead of careless, and raised them out of their little faith, that whenever they should seem to have but little provision of bread they should have no fear about food, but should despise all those things. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theophylact of Ohrid: Then understood they how that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. They thought that He was telling them to guard themselves against the stain of Jewish food, which is why they discussed among themselves that they had not brought any bread. He upbraids them for being mindless and of little faith. They were mindless by not remembering how many He had fed with how many loaves; they showed little faith by not believing that Christ Himself could provide bread even if they had not bought any bread from the Jews. As He rebuked them rather sharply — for meekness is not good on every occasion — they immediately understood that by “leaven” He meant “teaching”; such is the effect of a judicious rebuke on any occasion.

Matthew 16:13

Epiphanius Scholasticus: Caesarea Philippi is outside Judea in the region of the Gentiles. Why therefore did our Lord not examine his own disciples within the borders of Judea? Why did he go far north into the territory of the Gentiles? But as our insignificance [as Gentiles] works against us, he questioned the disciples in Gentile territory. The result was that by the true and everlasting conviction of the blessed apostle Peter—what flesh and blood had not unveiled, the Father revealed from the heavens. Through faith the Gentiles rather than the Jews would come to acknowledge the Son of God. This indeed occurred in the city of Caesarea—Cornelius who was first among the Gentiles to believe with all his own household, through the holy apostle Peter. The Lord was not inclined to question his own disciples in Judea, when the Jews did not believe that he was the Son of God but regarded him merely as the son of Joseph. — INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 28

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (non occ.) As soon as the Lord had taken His disciples out of the teaching of the Pharisees, He then suitably proceeds to lay deep the foundations of the Gospel doctrine; and to give this the greater solemnity, it is introduced by the name of the place, When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi.

(ap. Anselm.) When about to confirm the disciples in the faith, He would first take away from their minds the errors and opinions of others, whence it follows, And he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?

(non occ.) So by this instance of the Apostles, the followers of the Bishops are instructed, that whatever opinions they may hear out of doors concerning their Bishops, they should tell them to them.

(interlin.) That is, shall not separate it from the love and faith of Me.

(interlin.) It follows, And whatsoever thou shalt bind; that is, whomsoever thou shalt judge unworthy of forgiveness while he lives, shall be judged unworthy with God; and whatsoever thou shalt loose, that is, whomsoever thou shalt judge worthy to be forgiven while he lives, shall obtain forgiveness of his sins from God.

(ap. Anselm.) This power was committed specially to Peter, that we might thereby be invited to unity. For He therefore appointed him the head of the Apostles, that the Church might have one principal Vicar of Christ, to whom the different members of the Church should have recourse, if ever they should have dissensions among them. But if there were many heads in the Church, the bond of unity would be broken. Some say that the words upon earth denote that power was not given to men to bind and loose the dead, but the living; for he who should loose the dead would do this not upon earth, but after the earth. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): By asking, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? He implied that something ought to be thought respecting Him beyond what appeared, for He was the Son of Man. And in thus enquiring after men’s opinion respecting Himself, we are not to think that He made confession of Himself; for that which He asked for was something concealed, to which the faith of believers ought to extend itself. We must hold that form of confession, that we so mention the Son of God as not to forget the Son of Man, for the one without the other offers us no hope of salvation; and therefore He said emphatically, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?

This is the true and unalterable faith, that from God came forth God the Son, who has eternity out of the eternity of the Father. That this God took unto Him a body and was made man is a perfect confession. Thus He embraced all in that He here expresses both His nature and His name, in which is the sum of virtues.

This confession of Peter met a worthy reward, for that he had seen the Son of God in the man. Whence it follows, Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas, for flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven.

Otherwise; He is blessed, because to have looked and to have seen beyond human sight is matter of praise, not beholding that which is of flesh and blood, but seeing the Son of God by the revelation of the heavenly Father; and he was held worthy to be the first to acknowledge the divinity which was in Christ.

But in this bestowing of a new name is a happy foundation of the Church, and a rock worthy of that building, which should break up the laws of hell, burst the gates of Tartarus, and all the shackles of death. And to show the firmness of this Church thus built upon a rock, He adds, And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): This Philip was the brother of Herod, the tetrarch of Ituræa, and the region of Trachonitis, who gave to the city, which is now called Panæas, the name of Cæsarea in honour of Tiberius Cæsar.

Beautifully is the question put, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? For they who speak of the Son of Man, are men: but they who understood His divine nature are called not men but Gods.

He says not, Whom, do men say that I am? but, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? that He should not seem to ask ostentatiously concerning Himself. Observe, that wherever the Old Testament has ‘Son of Man,’ the phrase in the Hebrew is ‘Son of Adam,’

It was as easy for the multitudes to be wrong in supposing Him to be Elias and Jeremias, as Herod in supposing Him to be John the Baptist; whence I wonder that some interpreters should have sought for the causes of these several errors.

Observe how by this connection of the discourse the Apostles are not styled men but Gods. For when He had said, Whom say ye that the Son of Man is? Ho adds, Whom say ye that I am? as much as to say, They being men think of Me as man, ye who are Gods, whom do you think Me?

He calls Him the living God, in comparison of those gods who are esteemed gods, but are dead; such, I mean, as Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, Hercules, and the other monsters of idols.

This return Christ makes to the Apostle for the testimony which Peter had spoken concerning Him, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. The Lord said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonas? Why? Because flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee, but My Father. That which flesh and blood could not reveal, was revealed by the grace of the Holy Spirit. By his confession then he obtains a title, which should signify that he had received a revelation from the Holy Spirit, whose son he shall also be called; for Barjonas in our tongue signifies The son of a dove. Others take it in the simple sense, that Peter is the son of Johnq, according to that question in another place, Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? (John 21:15.) affirming that it is an error of the copyists in writing here Barjonas for Barjoannas, dropping one syllable. Now Joanna is interpreted ‘The grace of God.’ But either name has its mystical interpretation; the dove signifies the Holy Spirit; and the grace of God signifies the spiritual gift.

Compare what is here said, flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, with the Apostolic declaration, Immediately I was not content with flesh and blood, (Gal. 1:16.) meaning there by this expression the Jews; so that here also the same thing is shown in different words, that not by the teaching of the Pharisees, but by the grace of God, Christ was revealed to him the Son of God.

As much as to say, You have said to me, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, therefore I say unto thee, not in a mere speech, and that goes not on into operation; but I say unto thee, and for Me to speak is to make it sor, that thou art Peter. For as from Christ proceeded that light to the Apostles, whereby they were called the light of the world, and those other names which were imposed upon them by the Lord, so upon Simon who believed in Christ the Rock, He bestowed the name of Peter (Rock.)

And pursuing the metaphor of the rock, it is rightly said to him as follows: And upon this rock I will build my Church.

I suppose the gates of hell to mean vice and sin, or at least the doctrines of heretics by which men are ensnared and drawn into hell.

Let none think that this is said of death, implying that the Apostles should not be subject to the condition of death, when we see their martyrdoms so illustrious.

Bishops and Presbyters; not understanding this passage, assume to themselves something of the lofty pretensions of the Pharisees, and suppose that they may either condemn the innocent, or absolve the guilty; whereas what will be enquired into before the Lord will be not the sentence of the Priests, but the life of him that is being judged. We read in Leviticus of the lepers, how they are commanded to show themselves to the Priests, and if they have the leprosy, then they are made unclean by the Priest; not that the Priest makes them leprous and unclean, but that the Priest has knowledge of what is leprosy and what is not leprosy, and can discern who is clean, and who is unclean. In the same way then as there the Priest makes the leper unclean, here the Bishop or Presbyter binds or looses not those who are without sin, or guilt, but in discharge of his function when he has heard the varieties of their sins, he knows who is to be bound, and who loosed. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 13) And Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi. This Philip is the brother of Herod, about whom we spoke before, the tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis regions, who built Caesarea, which is now called Paneas, in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and in honor of Caesar, and also named it after himself, Caesarea Philippi, and it is in the province of Phoenicia. He imitated his father Herod, who named Caesarea in honor of August Caesar, which was formerly called the Tower of Straton. And he built, in the name of his daughter Julia, across the Jordan. This place (which is also called Ille) is Caesarea Philippi, where the Jordan River originates at the foot of Mount Lebanon, and it has two springs, one called Jor and the other Dan, which, when mixed together, become the Jordan River.

And he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? He did not say, whom do men say that I am, but the Son of man: lest he should seem to seek glory from men. And note that wherever it is written in the Old Testament, son of man, in Hebrew it is written as son of Adam. Just as it is in that (also), which we read in the psalm: Sons of men, how long will you be heavy of heart? (Psal. IV, 3), which in Hebrew is said as sons of Adam. But beautifully he asks: Whom do people say the Son of Man is? For those who speak of the Son of Man are humans; but those who understand his divinity are not humans, but gods are called. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. liv.) He adds ‘of Philip,’ to distinguish it from the other Cæsarea, of Strato. And He asks this question in the former place, leading His disciples far out of the way of the Jews, that being set free from all fear, they might say freely what was in their mind.

He says not, Whom do the Scribes and Pharisees say that I am? but, Whom do men say that I am? searching into the minds of the common people, which were not perverted to evil. For though their opinion concerning Christ was much below what it ought to have been, yet it was free from wilful wickedness; but the opinion of the Pharisees concerning Christ was full of much malice.

The disciples having recounted the opinion of the common people, He then by a second question invites them to higher thoughts concerning Him, and therefore it follows, Jesus saith unto them, Whom say ye that I am? You who are with Me always, and have seen greater miracles than the multitudes, ought not to agree in the opinion of the multitudes. For this reason He did not put this question to them at the commencement of His preaching, but after He had done many signs; then also He spoke many things to them concerning His Deity.

When the Lord enquires concerning the opinion of the multitudes, all the disciples answer; but when all the disciples are asked, Peter as the mouth and head of the Apostles answers for all, as it follows, Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.

It would be without meaning to say, Thou art the son of Jonas, unless he intended to show that Christ is as naturally the Son of God, as Peter is the son of Jonas, that is, of the same substance as him that begot him.

And truly if Peter had not confessed that Christ was in a peculiar sense born of the Father, there had been no need of revelation; nor would he have been worthy of this blessing for confessing Christ to be one of many adopted sons; for before this they who were with Him in the ship had said, Truly thou art the Son of God. (John 1:49.) Nathanael also said, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God. Yet were not these blessed because they did not confess such sonship as does Peter here, but thought Him one among many, not in the true sense a son; or, if chief above all, yet not the substance of the Father. But see how the Father reveals the Son, and the Son the Father; from none other comes it to confess the Son than of the Father, and from none other to confess the Father than of the Son; so that from this place even it is manifest that the Son is of the same substance, and to be worshipped together with the Father. Christ then proceeds to show that many would hereafter believe what Peter had now confessed, whence He adds, And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter,

That is, On this faith and confession I will build my Church. Herein showing that many should believe what Peter had confessed, and raising his understanding, and making him His shepherd.

Then He speaks of another honour of Peter, when He adds, And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; as much as to say, As the Father hath given thee to know Me, I also will give something unto thee, namely, the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

See how Christ leads Peter to a high understanding concerning himself. These things that He here promises to give him, belong to God alone, namely to forgive sins, and to make the Church immoveable amidst the storms of so many persecutions and trials. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Wherefore hath he mentioned the founder of the city? Because there was another besides, Caesarea Stratonis. But not in that, but in this doth He ask them, leading them far away from the Jews, so that being freed from all alarm, they might speak with boldness all that was in their mind.

And wherefore did He not ask them at once their own opinion, but that of the people? In order that when they had told the people’s opinion, and then were asked, “But whom say ye that I am?” by the manner of His inquiry they might be led up to a sublimer notion, and not fall into the same low view as the multitude. Accordingly He asks them not at all in the beginning of His preaching, but when He had done many miracles, and had discoursed with them of many and high doctrines, and had afforded so many clear proofs of His Godhead, and of His unanimity with the Father, then He puts this question to them.

And He said not, “Whom say the Scribes and Pharisees that I am?” often as these had come unto Him, and discoursed with Him; but, “Whom do men say that I am?” inquiring after the judgment of the people, as unbiassed. For though it was far meaner than it should be, yet was it free from malice, but the other was teeming with much wickedness.

And signifying how earnestly He desires His Economy to be confessed, He saith, “The Son of Man;” thereby denoting His Godhead, which He doth also in many other places. For He saith, “No man hath ascended up to Heaven, but the Son of Man, which is in Heaven.” And again, “But when ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up, where He was before.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Christ puts this question to His disciples, that from their answer we may learn that there were at that time among the Jews various opinions concerning Christ; and to the end that we should always investigate what opinion men may form of us; that if any ill be said of us, we may cut off the occasions of it; or if any good, we may multiply the occasions of it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): He enquires the opinions of His disciples and of those without, not because He was ignorant of them; His disciples He asks, that He may reward with due reward their confession of a right faith, and the opinions of those without He enquires, that having the wrong opinions first set forth, it might be proved that the disciples had received the truth of their confession not from common opinion, but out of the hidden treasure of the Lord’s revelation.

And by a remarkable distinction it was that the Lord Himself puts forward the lowliness of the humanity which He had taken upon Him, while His disciple shows us the excellence of His divine eternity.

The gates of hell are the torments and promises of the persecutors. Also, the evil works of the unbelievers, and vain conversation, are gates of hell, because they show the path of destruction.

For as with a zeal beyond the others he had confessed the King of heaven, he is deservedly entrusted more than the others with the keys of the heavenly kingdom, that it might be clear to all, that without that confession and faith none ought to enter the kingdom of heaven. By the keys of the kingdom He means discernment and power; power, by which he binds and looses, discernment, by which he separates the worthy from the unworthy.

But this power of binding and loosing, though it seems given by the Lord to Peter alone, is indeed given also to the other Apostles, and is even now in the^ Bishops and Presbyters in every Church. (vid. Matt. 18:18.) But Peter received in a special manner the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and a supremacy of judicial power, that all the faithful throughout the world might understand that all who in any manner separate themselves from the unity of the faith, or from communion with him, such should neither be able to be loosed from the bonds of sin, nor to enter the gate of the heavenly kingdom. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Second Council of Constantinople ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Concil. Con. ii. Collat. 8.) How is it that some do presume to say that these things are said only of the living? Know they not that the sentence of anathema is nothing else but separation? They are to be avoided who are held of grievous faults, whether they are among the living, or not. For it is always behoveful to fly from the wicked. Moreover there are divers letters read of Augustine of religious memory, who was of great renown among the African bishops, which affirmed that heretics ought to be anathematized even after death. (vid. Aug. Ep. 185. 4.) Such an ecclesiastical tradition other African Bishops also have preserved. And the Holy Roman Church also has anathematized some Bishops after death, although no accusation had been brought against their faith in their lifetimeu. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: Rather is the nature preserved, though the life blushes; nor does Christ know other men than those with reference to whom He says, “Whom do men say that I am? " And, “As ye would that men should do to you, do ye likewise so to, them. — Scorpiace

Tertullian: Peter alone do I find-through (the mention of) his “mother-in-law” ,-to have been married. Monogamist I am led to presume him by consideration of the Church, which, built upon him, was destined to appoint every grade of her Order from monogamists. — On Monogamy

Theodore Stratelates: Jesus asks this in order that we might know what opinions about him were current among the Jews. [He also asks] so that we might learn to inquire intently into what people are saying about him, and if it is bad, to remove the causes, or if complimentary, to increase them. But he said “Son of man” in order to show that he himself not only appears to be but in fact unchangeably is man, and again, is true God. [It is] not as if he were divided into different species, one part God and one part man; rather one may address him as Son of man with no doubt that this very same one is also the Son of God. — FRAGMENT 101.5

Theophylact of Ohrid: The evangelist mentions the founder of the city, Philip, because there is another Caesarea, of Strato, and it was not in the latter, but in the former, that Christ asked them the question. He leads the disciples far away from the Jews so that they could speak boldly without fear of anyone. First He asks for the opinion of the multitude so that the disciples would be directed upwards to a greater understanding and not fall into the same lowliness of understanding as that of the people. He does not ask them, “Who do the Pharisees say that I am?” but “Who do men say?” referring to the guileless multitude.

Matthew 16:14

Jerome: (Verse 14.) But they said: Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. Jesus says to them, I wonder that some interpreters seek the reasons for each individual’s errors, and weave a lengthy argument about why some thought that our Lord Jesus Christ was John, others Elijah, others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. If they could be mistaken about Elijah and Jeremiah, how did Herod mistake John, saying: I myself beheaded John, he has risen from the dead, and powers are at work in him (Mark 6:16). — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: Then, since they said, “Some John the Baptist, some Elias, some Jeremias, or one of the prophets,” and set forth their mistaken opinion, He next added, “But whom say ye that I am?” calling them on by His second inquiry to entertain some higher imagination concerning Him, and indicating that their former judgment falls exceedingly short of His dignity. Wherefore He seeks for another judgment from themselves, and puts a second question, that they might not fall in with the multitude, who, because they saw His miracles greater than human, accounted Him a man indeed, but one that had appeared after a resurrection, as Herod also said. But He, to lead them away from this notion, saith, “But whom say ye that I am?” that is, “ye that are with me always, and see me working miracles, and have yourselves done many mighty works by me.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria: Just look at the differences of opinion among the Jews about Jesus. Some, following corrupt thinking, said he was John the Baptist (for example, Herod the tetrarch, who asked his servants, “Is this John the Baptizer now risen from the dead and, because of this, with powers at work in him?”) Others said that Elijah is now the one called Jesus. He has either been born a second time or he has been alive somewhere all along and is now appearing again. Some suggested Jeremiah was Jesus, and not that Jeremiah was a type of Christ. This comes perhaps from a mistaken interpretation of a passage in the beginning of Jeremiah about Christ’s prophecy unfulfilled in the time of the prophet but beginning to be fulfilled in Jesus, whom God set up over nations and kingdoms “to root up, and to build up, and to transplant.” — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.9

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Then the disciples recount the divers opinions of the Jews relating to Christ; And they said, Some say John the Baptist, following Herod’s opinion; others Elias, (vid. Matt. 14:2.) supposing either that Elias had gone through a second birth, or that having continued alive in the body, He had at this time appeared; others Jeremias, whom the Lord had ordained to be Prophet among the Gentiles, not understanding that Jeremias was a type of Christ; or one of the Prophets, in a like way, because of those things which God spoke to them through the Prophets, yet they were not fulfilled in them, but in Christ. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theodore of Mopsuestia: In the same way they had supposed that Christ was Jeremiah. Perhaps they knew that the Lord had wisdom from his birth and was without peer in his teaching. Something similar was thought of Jeremiah, in that as a child he was singled out for prophecy and that without human training he was the prophet of a greater prophet who was to follow. — FRAGMENT 91

Theophylact of Ohrid: Among those who called Him John was Herod, who thought that John after rising from the dead had also received the gift of working miracles. Those who thought He was Elijah did so because of the way in which Christ rebuked and because Elijah was expected to return. Those who thought He was Jeremiah, did so because of His natural wisdom acquired without any instruction. For while Jeremiah was yet a child, he was commanded to prophesy.

Matthew 16:15

Hilary of Poitiers: When they had presented diverse human origins concerning him, he asked what they themselves thought about him. Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” But Peter had pondered the nature of the question. For the Lord had said, “Whom do men say that the Son of man is?” Certainly his human body indicated he was a Son of man. But by adding “Who do you say that I am?” Jesus indicated that they should consider something besides what he seemed in himself, for he was a Son of man. Therefore what judgment concerning himself did he desire? It was a secret he was asking about, into which the faith of those who believe ought to extend itself. — Commentary on Matthew 16.6

Jerome: (Verse 15, 16.) But who do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Wise reader, take note that from the following text and the discourse, the apostles are not called men, but gods. For when he had said: Who do men say that the Son of man is, he added: But who do you say that I am? To them, who are men, forming their opinions based on human things; but to you, who are gods, what do you think of me being? Peter, speaking on behalf of all the apostles, declares: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. He calls Him the living God, in distinction from those gods who are thought to be gods but are dead: Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, Minerva (or Ceres), Bacchus, Hercules, and other monstrous idols. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: Wherefore He seeks for another judgment from themselves, and puts a second question, that they might not fall in with the multitude, who, because they saw His miracles greater than human, accounted Him a man indeed, but one that had appeared after a resurrection, as Herod also said. But He, to lead them away from this notion, saith, “But whom say ye that I am?” that is, “ye that are with me always, and see me working miracles, and have yourselves done many mighty works by me.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Matthew 16:16

Cyril of Alexandria: Peter did not say “you are a Christ” or “a son of God” but “the Christ, the Son of God.” For there are many christs by grace, who have attained the rank of adoption [as sons], but [there is] only one who is by nature the Son of God. Thus, using the definite article, he said, the Christ, the Son of God. And in calling him Son of the living God, Peter indicates that Christ himself is life and that death has no authority over him. And even if the flesh, for a short while, was weak and died, nevertheless it rose again, since the Word, who indwelled it, could not be held under the bonds of death. — FRAGMENT 190

Epiphanius Scholasticus: Did the Lord not know what people called him? But by questioning he brought forth the conviction of the apostle Peter and left for us in the future a strong affirmation of faith. For the Lord questioned not only Peter but all the apostles when he said, “Who do you say that I am?” Yet one on behalf of all answered the King, who is in due time to judge the whole world. He is God, both God and man. How miserable does this make those who are false teachers and strangers now, and to be judged in eternity. If Christ is the Son of God, by all means he is also God. If he is not God, he is not the Son of God. But since he himself is the Son, and as the Son takes up all things from the Father, let us hold this same one inseparably in our heart because there is no one who escapes his hand. — INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 28

John Chrysostom: What then saith the mouth of the apostles, Peter, the ever fervent, the leader of the apostolic choir? When all are asked, he answers. And whereas when He asked the opinion of the people, all replied to the question; when He asked their own, Peter springs forward, and anticipates them, and saith, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Peter denied that Jesus was any of those things which the Jews supposed, by his confession, Thou art the Christ, which the Jews were ignorant of; but he added what was more, the Son of the living God, (Ezek. 33:11.) who had said by his Prophets, I live, saith the Lord. And therefore was He called the living Lord, but in a more especial manner as being eminent above all that had life; for He alone has immortality, and is the fount of life, wherefore He is rightly called God the Father; for He is life as it were flowing out of a fountain, who said, I am the life. (John 14:6.)

It must be enquired in this place whether, when they were first sent out, the disciples knew that He was the Christ. For this speech shows that Peter then first confessed Him to be the Son of the living God. And look whether you can solve a question of this sort, by saying that to believe Jesus to be the Christ is less than to know Him; and so suppose that when they were sent to preach they believed that Jesus was the Christ, and afterwards as they made progress they knew Him to be so. Or must we answer thus; That then the Apostles had the beginnings of a knowledge of Christ, and knew some little concerning Him; and that they made progress afterwards in the knowledge of Him, so that they were able to receive the knowledge of Christ revealed by the Father, as Peter, who is here blessed, not only for that he says, Thou art the Christ, but much more for that he adds, the Son of the living God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: This (divine relationship) Nathanµl at once recognised in Him, even as Peter did on another occasion: “Thou art the Son of God.” And He affirmed Himself that they were quite right in their convictions; for He answered Nathanµl: “Because I said, I saw thee under the fig-tree, therefore dose thou believe?” And in the same manner He pronounced Peter to be “blessed,” inasmuch as “flesh and blood had not revealed it to him”-that he had perceived the Father-“but the Father which is in heaven. — Against Praxeas

Tertullian: Again, when Martha in a later passage acknowledged Him to be the Son of God, she no more made a mistake than Peter and Nathanµl had; and yet, even if she had made a mistake, she would at once have learnt the truth: for, behold, when about to raise her brother from the dead, the Lord looked up to heaven, and, addressing the Father, said-as the Son, of course: “Father, I thank Thee that Thou always hearest me; it is because of these crowds that are standing by that I have spoken to Thee, that they may believe that Thou hast sent me. — Against Praxeas

Theophylact of Ohrid: . Once again Peter leaps forward with fervor and confesses that He is truly the Son of God. He did not say, “Thou art the anointed one, a son of God,” without the article “the,” but with the article, “the Son,” that is, He Who is the One and the Only, not a son by grace, but He Who is begotten of the same essence as the Father. For there were also many other christs, anointed ones, such as all the priests and kings; but the Christ, with the article, there is but One.

Matthew 16:17

Jerome: (Verse 17.) But Jesus answered and said to him: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. The Apostles answer on behalf of Jesus. Peter had said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God; a true confession has received a reward: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona. Why? because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but the Father revealed it. What flesh and blood could not reveal, has been revealed by the grace of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, from confession, it obtains the name which has revelation from the Holy Spirit, whose son is also to be called. For indeed, Barjona in our language means son of a dove. Others simply understand that Simon, that is, Peter, is the son of John, according to the question in another place: Simon, son of John, do you love me? (John 21:15) He answered: Lord, you know. And by the fault of the writers, it is corrupted so that instead of Bar Joanna, that is, son of John, it is written Barjona, with one syllable removed. Joanna, however, means ‘by the grace of the Lord.’ Both names can be understood mystically, as both the dove represents the Holy Spirit and grace represents the spiritual gift of God. Also, what is said, ‘For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you,’ is compared to the apostolic narrative where it says, ‘I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood’ (Galatians 1:16), signifying the Jews as flesh and blood, so that here also it may be demonstrated in a different sense that Christ, the Son of God, was revealed to him not through the teaching of the Pharisees, but through the grace of God. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: What then saith Christ? “Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee.”

Yet surely unless he had rightly confessed Him, as begotten of the very Father Himself, this were no work of revelation; had he accounted our Lord to be one of the many, his saying was not worthy of a blessing. Since before this also they said, “Truly He is Son of God,” those, I mean, who were in the vessel after the tempest, which they saw, and were not blessed, although of course they spake truly. For they confessed not such a Sonship as Peter, but accounted Him to be truly Son as one of the many, and though peculiarly so beyond the many, yet not of the same substance.

And Nathanael too said, “Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel;” and so far from being blessed, he is even reproved by Him, as having said what was far short of the truth. He replied at least, “Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig-tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.”

Why then is this man blessed? Because he acknowledged Him very Son. Wherefore you see, that while in those former instances He had said no such thing, in this case He also signifies who had revealed it. That is, lest his words might seem to the many (because he was an earnest lover of Christ) to be words of friendship and flattery, and of a disposition to show favor to Him, he brings forward the person who had made them ring in his soul; to inform thee that Peter indeed spake, but the Father suggested, and that thou mightest believe the saying to be no longer a human opinion, but a divine doctrine.

And wherefore doth He not Himself declare it, nor say, “I am the Christ,” but by His question establish this, bringing them in to confess it? Because so to do was both more suitable to Him, yea necessary at that time, and it drew them on the more to the belief of the things that were said.

Seest thou how the Father reveals the Son, how the Son the Father? For “neither knoweth any man the Father,” saith He, “save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.” It cannot therefore be that one should learn the Son of any other than of the Father; neither that one should learn the Father of any other than of the Son. So that even hereby, their sameness of honor and of substance is manifest. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But in heavenly things every spiritual sin is a gate of hell, to which are opposed the gates of righteousness.

He does not express what it is which they shall not prevail against, whether the rock on which He builds the Church, or the Church which He builds on the rock; but it is clear that neither against the rock nor against the Church will the gates of hell prevail.

Wherefore if we, by the revelation of our Father who is in heaven, shall confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, having also our conversation in heaven, to us also shall be said, Thou art Peter; for every one is a Rock who is an imitator of Christ. But against whomsoever the gates of hell prevail, he is neither to be called a rock upon which Christ builds His Church; neither a Church, or part of the Church, which Christ builds upon a rock. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theodore of Mopsuestia: This is not the property of Peter alone, but it came about on behalf of every human being. Having said that his confession is a rock, he stated that upon this rock I will build my church. This means he will build his church upon this same confession and faith. For this reason, addressing the one who first confessed him with this title, on account of his confession he applied to him this authority, too, as something that would become his, speaking of the common and special good of the church as pertaining to him alone. It was from this confession, which was going to become the common property of all believers, that he bestowed upon him this name, the rock. In the same way also Jesus attributes to him the special character of the church, as though it existed beforehand in him on account of his confession. By this he shows, in consequence, that this is the common good of the church, since also the common element of the confession was to come to be first in Peter. This then is what he says, that in the church would be the key of the kingdom of heaven. If anyone holds the key to this, to the church, in the same way he will also hold it for all heavenly things. He who is counted as belonging to the church and is recognized as its member is a partaker and an inheritor of heaven. He who is a stranger to it, whatever his status may be, will have no communion in heavenly things. To this very day the priests of the church have expelled those who are unworthy by this saying and admitted those who have become worthy by repentance. — FRAGMENT 92

Theophylact of Ohrid: . He calls Peter blessed for having received knowledge by divine grace. And by commending Peter, He thereby shows the opinions of other men to be false. For He calls him “Bar Jona,” that is, “son of Jona,” as if saying, “Just as you are the son of Jona, so am I the Son of My Father in heaven, and of one essence with Him.” He calls this knowledge “revelation,” speaking of hidden and unknown things that were disclosed by the Father.

Tyrannius Rufinus: Peter was for twenty-four years Bishop of the Church of Rome. We cannot doubt that, amongst other things necessary for the instruction of the church, he himself delivered to them the treasury of the sacred books, which, no doubt, had even then begun to be read under his presidency and teaching. — The Apology of Rufinus (Book II), Section 33

Matthew 16:18

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (de Cons. Ev. ii. 53.) But let none suppose that Peter received that name here; he received it at no other time than where John relates that it was said unto him, Thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted, Peter. (John 1:42.)

(Retract. i. 21.) I have said in a certain place of the Apostle Peter, that it was on him, as on a rock, that the Church was built. But I know that since that I have often explained these words of the Lord, Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my Church, as meaning upon Him whom Peter had confessed in the words, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God; and so that Peter, taking his name from this rock, would represent the Church, which is built upon this rock. For it is not said to him, Thou art the rock, but, Thou art Peter. (1 Cor. 10:4.) But the rock was Christ, whom because Simon thus confessed, as the whole Church confesses Him, he was named Peter. Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions seems to him the more probable. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Cyril of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA.s; According to this promise of the Lord, the Apostolic Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud, above all Heads and Bishops, and Primates of Churches and people, with its own Pontiffs, with most abundant faith, and the authority of Peter. And while other Churches have to blush for the error of some of their members, this reigns alone immoveably established, enforcing silence, and stopping the mouths of all heretics; and wet, not drunken with the wine of pride, confess together with it the type of truth, and of the holy apostolic tradition. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

JRR Tolkien: I myself am convinced by the Petrine claims, nor looking around the world does there seem much doubt which (if Christianity is true) is the True Church, the temple of the Spirit* dying but living, corrupt but holy, self-reforming and rearising. But for me that Church of which the Pope is the acknowledged head on earth has as chief claim that it is the one that has (and still does) ever defended the Blessed Sacrament, and given it most honour, and put it (as Christ plainly intended) in the prime place. ‘Feed my sheep’ was His last charge to St Peter; and since His words are always first to be understood literally, I suppose them to refer primarily to the Bread of Life. It was against this that the W. European revolt (or Reformation) was really launched – ’the blasphemous fable of the Mass’ – and faith/works a mere red herring. I suppose the greatest reform of our time was that carried out by St Pius X surpassing anything, however needed, that the Council will achieve. I wonder what state the Church would now be but for it.

• Not that one should forget the wise words of Charles Williams, that it is our duty to tend the accredited and established altar, though the Holy Spirit may send the fire down somewhere else. God cannot be limited (even by his own Foundations) – of which St Paul is the first & prime example – and may use any channel for His grace. Even to love Our Lord, and certainly to call him Lord, and God, is a grace, and may bring more grace. Nonetheless, speaking institutionally and not of individual souls the channel must eventually run back into the ordained course, or run into the sands and perish. Besides the Sun there may be moonlight (even bright enough to read by); but if the Sun were removed there would be no Moon to see. What would Christianity now be if the Roman Church has in fact been destroyed? — Letter #250, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, To Michael Tolkien 1963

Jerome: (Verse 18.) And I also say to you. What is it that he says: And I also say to you? Because you have said to me: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God; and I say to you, not with empty words, and having no need, but I say to you: what I have said, I have done.

Because you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. Just as he gave the title of ’light’ to the apostles, so too did he bestow upon Simon, who believed in Christ the rock, the name of Peter. But according to the metaphor of the rock, it is rightly said to him: I will build my church upon you.

And the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I consider the gates of Hell to be vices and sins: or certainly the doctrines of heretics, through which deceived men are led to Tartarus. Therefore, let no one suppose that it is said concerning death, that the apostles were not subject to the condition of death, whose martyrdoms he sees flashing. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: What then saith Christ? “Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas; thou shalt be called Cephas.” “Thus since thou hast proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begat thee;” all but saying, “As thou art son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father.” Else it were superfluous to say, “Thou art Son of Jonas;” but since he had said, “Son of God,” to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begat Him, therefore He added this, “And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;” that is, on the faith of his confession. Hereby He signifies that many were now on the point of believing, and raises his spirit, and makes him a shepherd. “And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” “And if not against it, much more not against me. So be not troubled because thou art shortly to hear that I shall be betrayed and crucified.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Tertullian: What man, then, of sound mind can possibly suppose that they were ignorant of anything, whom the Lord ordained to be masters (or teachers), keeping them, as He did, inseparable (from Himself) in their attendance, in their discipleship, in their society, to whom, “when they were alone, He used to expound” all things which were obscure, telling them that “to them it was given to know those mysteries,” which it was not permitted the people to understand? Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called “the rock on which the church should be built,” who also obtained “the keys of the kingdom of heaven,” with the power of “loosing and binding in heaven and on earth? " Was anything, again, concealed from John, the Lord’s most beloved disciple, who used to lean on His breast to whom alone the Lord pointed Judas out as the traitor, whom He commended to Mary as a son in His own stead? Of what could He have meant those to be ignorant, to whom He even exhibited His own glory with Moses and Elias, and the Father’s voice moreover, from heaven? Not as if He thus disapproved of all the rest, but because “by three witnesses must every word be established. — The Prescription Against Heretics

Tertullian: If, because the Lord has said to Peter, “Upon this rock will I build My Church,” “to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, “Whatsoever thou shale have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens,” you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? “On thee,” He says, “will I build My Church; “and,” I will give to thee the keys,” not to the Church; and, “Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound,” not what they shall have loosed or bound. — On Modesty

Theophylact of Ohrid: The Lord gives Peter a great reward, that the Church will be built on him. Since Peter confessed Him as Son of God, the Lord says, “This confession which you have made shall be the foundation of those who believe, so that every man who intends to build the house of faith shall lay down this confession as the foundation.” For even if we should construct a myriad of virtues, but we do not have as a foundation the orthodox confession, our construction is rotten. By saying “My Church” He shows that He is the Master of all, for the whole universe is the servant of God. The gates of hades are those persecutors who from time to time would send the Christians to hades. But the heretics, too, are gates leading to hades. The Church, then, has prevailed over many persecutors and many heretics. The Church is also each one of us who has become a house of God. For if we have been established on the confession of Christ, the gates of hades, which are our sins, will not prevail against us. It was from these gates that David, too, had been lifted up when he said, “O Thou that dost raise me up from the gates of death” (Ps. 9:13). From what gates, O David? From those twin gates of murder and adultery.

Matthew 16:19

Epiphanius Scholasticus: For Christ is a rock which is never disturbed or worn away. Therefore Peter gladly received his name from Christ to signify the established and unshaken faith of the church.… The devil is the gateway of death who always hastens to stir up against the holy church calamities and temptations and persecutions. But the faith of the apostle, which was founded upon the rock of Christ, abides always unconquered and unshaken. And the very keys of the kingdom of the heavens have been handed down so that one whom he has bound on earth has been bound in heaven, and one whom he has set free on earth he has also set free in heaven. — INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 28

Hilary of Poitiers: By asking, “Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?” He implied that something ought to be thought respecting Him beyond what appeared, for He was the Son of Man. And in thus enquiring after men’s opinion respecting Himself, we are notto think that He made confession of Himself; for that which He asked for was something concealed, to which the faith of believers ought to extend itself. This is the true and unalterable faith, that from God came forth God the Son, who has eternity out of the eternity of the Father. That this God took unto Hima body and was made man is a perfect confession. Thus He embraced all in that He here expresses both His nature and His name, in which is the sum of virtues. This confession of Peter met a worthy reward, for that he had seen the Son of Godin the man. Whence it follows, “Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed artthou, Simon Bar-jonas, for flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. “Others take it in the simple sense, that Peter is the son of John affirming that it is an error of the copyists in writing here Barjonas for Barjoannas, dropping one syllable. Now Joanna is interpreted ‘The grace of God.’ But either name has its mystical interpretation; the dove signifies the Holy Spirit; and the grace of God signifies the spiritual gift. Otherwise; He is blessed, because to have looked and to have seen beyond human sight is matter of praise, not beholding that which is of flesh and blood, but seeing the Son of God by the revelation of the heavenly Father; and he was held worthy to be the first to acknowledge the divinity which was in Christ. But in this bestowing of a new name is a happy foundation of the Church, and arock worthy of that building, which should break up the laws of hell, burst the gates of Tartarus, and all the shackles of death. And to show the firmness of this Church thus built upon a rock, He adds, “And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

Jerome: (Verse 19.) And I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. The bishops and priests who do not understand this passage, arrogantly assume to themselves something of the Pharisees, either to condemn the innocent or to release the guilty; whereas with God, it is not the judgment of priests, but the life of the accused that is sought. In Leviticus (Chapter 14), we read about leprosy, where they are commanded to show themselves to the priests, and if they have leprosy, then they become unclean by the priest: not that priests make lepers and unclean; but so that they have knowledge of who is leprous and who is not, and they can discern who is clean and who is unclean. So just as the priest there makes the leper clean or unclean, so here the bishop and priest bind or loose, not those who are innocent or guilty; but according to their office, when they hear the varieties of sins, they know who should be bound and who should be loosed. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: Then He mentions also another honor. “And I also will give thee the keys of the heavens.” But what is this, “And I also will give thee?” “As the Father hath given thee to know me, so will I also give thee.”

And He said not, “I will entreat the Father” (although the manifestation of His authority was great, and the largeness of the gift unspeakable), but, “I will give thee.” What dost Thou give? tell me. “The keys of the heavens, that whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in Heaven.” How then is it not “His to give to sit on His right hand, and on His left,” when He saith, “I will give thee”?

Seest thou how He, His own self, leads Peter on to high thoughts of Him, and reveals Himself, and implies that He is Son of God by these two promises? For those things which are peculiar to God alone, (both to absolve sins, and to make the church incapable of overthrow in such assailing waves, and to exhibit a man that is a fisher more solid than any rock, while all the world is at war with him), these He promises Himself to give; as the Father, speaking to Jeremiah, said, He would make him as “a brazen pillar, and as a wall;” but him to one nation only, this man in every part of the world.

I would fain inquire then of those who desire to lessen the dignity of the Son, which manner of gifts were greater, those which the Father gave to Peter, or those which the Son gave him? For the Father gave to Peter the revelation of the Son; but the Son gave him to sow that of the Father and that of Himself in every part of the world; and to a mortal man He entrusted the authority over all things in Heaven, giving him the keys; who extended the church to every part of the world, and declared it to be stronger than heaven. “For heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away.” How then is He less, who hath given such gifts, hath effected such things?

And these things I say, not dividing the works of Father and Son (“for all things are made by Him, and without Him was nothing made which was made”): but bridling the shameless tongue of them that dare so to speak.

But see, throughout all, His authority: “I say unto thee, Thou art Peter; I will build the Church; I will give thee the keys of Heaven.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): See how great power has that rock upon which the Church is built, that its sentences are to continue firm as though God gave sentence by it.

Let him then be without blame who binds or looses another, that he may be found worthy to bind or loose in heaven. Moreover, to him who shall be able by his virtues to shut the gates of hell, are given in reward the keys of the kingdom of heaven. For every kind of virtue when any has begun to practise it, as it were opens itself before Him, the Lord, namely, opening it through His grace, so that the same virtue is found to be both the gate, and the key of the gate. But it may be that each virtue is itself the kingdom of heaven. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: If, because the Lord has said to Peter, “Upon this rock will I build My Church,” “to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, “Whatsoever thou shale have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens,” you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? “On thee,” He says, “will I build My Church; “and,” I will give to thee the keys,” not to the Church; and, “Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound,” not what they shall have loosed or bound. — On Modesty

Tertullian: If, because the Lord has said to Peter, “Upon this rock will I build My Church,” “to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, “Whatsoever thou shale have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens,” you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? “On thee,” He says, “will I build My Church; “and,” I will give to thee the keys,” not to the Church; and, “Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound,” not what they shall have loosed or bound. — On Modesty

Theophylact of Ohrid: . He spoke as God, with authority, “I will give unto thee.” For as the Father gave you the revelation, so I give you the keys. By “keys” understand that which binds or looses transgressions, namely, penance or absolution; for those who, like Peter, have been deemed worthy of the grace of the episcopate, have the authority to absolve or to bind. Even though the words “I will give unto thee” were spoken to Peter alone, yet they were given to all the apostles. Why? Because He said, “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted.” Also, the words “I will give” indicate a future time, namely, after the Resurrection. “The heavens” also mean the virtues, and the keys to the heavens are labors. For by laboring we enter into each of the virtues as if by means of keys that are used to open. If I do not labor but only know the good, I possess only the key of knowledge but remain outside. That man is bound in the heavens, that is, in the virtues, who does not walk in them, but he who is diligent in acquiring virtues is loosed in them. Therefore let us not have sins, so that we may not be bound by the chains of our own sins.

Matthew 16:20

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): When then above He sends His disciples to preach, and commands them to proclaim His advent, this seems contrary to His command here, that they should not say that He is Jesus the Christ. To me it seems that it is one thing to preach Christ, and another to preach Jesus the Christ. Christ is a common title of dignity, Jesus the proper name of the Saviour.

But that none should suppose that this is only my explanation, and not an evangelic interpretation, what follows explains the reasons of His forbidding them to preach Him at that time; Then began Jesus to show unto his disciples that he must needs go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and Scribes, and Chief Priests, and be put to death, and rise again the third day. The meaning is; Then preach Me when I shall have suffered these things, for it will be of no avail that Christ be preached publicly, and His Majesty spread abroad among the people, when after a little time they shall see Him scourged and crucified. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: For the purpose of proclaiming, he had sent his disciples before him and ordered them to announce his arrival. But he advised them lest they say publicly that he was Jesus Christ. It seems to me to be one thing to proclaim him to be Christ, another thing to proclaim him to be Jesus Christ. Christ is a common term for the messianic dignity, while Jesus is the proper name for the Savior. It is possible that for this reason he had been unwilling to be proclaimed Jesus Christ prior to his suffering and resurrection in order that he might afterwards, when the obligation of blood had been fulfilled, at an opportune time say to his apostles, “Go and teach all nations” and the rest. And lest anyone think that this is merely our opinion and not the perceptions of the Evangelist, then what follows explains further the reasons for the prohibited proclamation. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 3.16.20

Jerome: (Verse 20) Then he commanded his disciples not to tell anyone that he was Jesus Christ. Before sending the disciples to preach, he had ordered them to announce his coming: here he instructed them not to say that he was Jesus Christ. It seems to me that preaching Christ is one thing, and preaching Jesus Christ is another. Christ is a common name of dignity: Jesus is the proper name of the Savior. However, it may be that before his passion and resurrection, he did not want to be preached; but after the completion of the sacrament of his blood, he would more fittingly say to the apostles: Go, teach all nations (Matthew last chapter, verse 19), etc. So that no one thinks that our intelligence alone, and not the Gospel teachings that follow, explain the reasons for the prohibition of preaching at that time. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For what having once had root has afterwards been torn up, if it is again planted, is with difficulty retained among the multitude; but what having been once rooted has continued ever after unmoved, is easily brought on to a further growth. He therefore dwells on these sorrowful things, and repeats His discourse upon them, that He may open the minds of His disciples. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: And then, when He had so said, “He charged them that they should tell no man that He was the Christ.”

And why did He charge them? That when the things which offend are taken out of the way, and the cross is accomplished, and the rest of His sufferings fulfilled, and when there is nothing any more to interrupt and disturb the faith of the people in Him, the right opinion concerning Him may be engraven pure and immovable in the mind of the hearers. For, in truth, His power had not yet clearly shone forth. Accordingly it was His will then to be preached by them, when both the plain truth of the facts, and the power of His deeds were pleading in support of the assertions of the apostles. For it was by no means the same thing to see Him in Palestine, now working miracles, and now insulted and persecuted (and especially when the very cross was presently to follow the miracles that were happening); and to behold him everywhere in the world, adored and believed, and no more suffering anything, such as He had suffered.

Therefore He bids them “tell no man.” For that which hath been once rooted and then plucked up, would hardly, if planted, again be retained among the many; but that which, once fixed, hath remained immovable, and hath suffered injury from no quarter, easily mounts up, and advances to a greater growth.

And if they who had enjoyed the benefit of many miracles, and had had part in so many unutterable mysteries, were offended by the mere hearing of it; or rather not these only, but even the leader of them all, Peter; consider what it was likely the common sort should feel, being first told that He is the Son of God, then seeing Him even crucified and spit upon, and that without knowledge of the secret of those mysteries, or participation in the gift of the Holy Ghost. For if to His disciples He said, “I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now;” much more would the rest of the people have utterly failed, had the chiefest of these mysteries been revealed to them before the proper time. Accordingly He forbids them to tell.

And to instruct thee how great a thing it was, their afterwards learning His doctrine complete, when the things that offend had passed by; learn it from this same leader of theirs. For this very Peter, he who after so many miracles proved so weak as even to deny Him, and to be in fear of a mean damsel; after the cross had come forth, and he had received the certain proofs of the resurrection, and there was nothing more to offend and trouble him, retained the teaching of the Spirit so immovable, that more vehemently than a lion he sprang upon the people of the Jews, for all the dangers and innumerable deaths which were threatened.

With reason then did He bid them not tell the many before the crucifixion, since not even to them that were to teach did He venture to commit all before the crucifixion. “For I have many things to say unto you,” saith He, “but ye cannot bear them now.”

And of the things too that He did say, they do not understand many, which He did not make plain before the crucifixion. At least when He was risen from the dead, then and not before they knew some of His sayings. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Seeing Peter had confessed Him to be Christ the Son of the living God, because He would not have them preach this in the mean time, He adds, Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

Or they then spake of Him in lowly words, as only a great and wonderful man, but as yet proclaimed Him not as the Christ. Yet if any will have it that He was even at the first proclaimed to be Christ, he may say that now He chose that first short announcement of His name to be left in silence and not repeated, that that little which they had heard concerning Christ might be digested into their minds. Or the difficulty may be solved thus: that the former relation concerning their preaching Christ does not belong to the time before His Resurrection, but to the time that should be after the Resurrection; and that the command now given is meant for the time present; for it were of no use to preach Him, and to be silent concerning His cross. Moreover, He commanded them that they should tell no man that He was the Christ, and prepared them that they should afterwards say that He was Christ who was crucified, and who rose again from the dead. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theodore of Mopsuestia: When the disciples had received the Spirit, then the teaching concerning the divinity of the Son was shown to them perfectly and the Spirit himself bore witness through the miracles that were done in his name. Yet it was still necessary that this be hidden from the rulers, the elemental powers of this world, so that Christ, by suffering and rising again, might transform in himself human life and recreate it, changing it back to the state it was in at the beginning of its corruption. This perhaps is the reason why of necessity this instruction had not yet been given them. — FRAGMENT 93

Theophylact of Ohrid: Before the Cross, Christ wanted to obscure His own glory. For if, before the Passion, men heard that He was God and then saw Him suffering, how could they not be scandalized? This is why He hid Himself from the multitude, so that after the Resurrection He might be known without causing any scandal, the Holy Spirit removing all doubt by means of the miracles performed.

Matthew 16:21

Jerome: (Verse 21) Then Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. And the meaning is: Proclaim me then, when I have suffered these things, because it is not profitable to publicly proclaim Christ and make known his majesty to the people, who after a little while will see him whipped and crucified, and suffer many things from the elders, chief priests, and scribes. And now Jesus suffers many things from those who crucify the Son of God again (Heb. VI): and when the elders are thought to be in the Church, and the high priests, following the simple letter, kill the Son of God, who is wholly felt in spirit. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: “From that time forth began He to show unto them that He must suffer. From that time.” What time? When He had fixed the doctrine in them; when He had brought in the beginning of the Gentiles.

But not even so did they understand what He said. “For the saying,” it is said, “was hid from them;” and they were as in a kind of perplexity, not knowing that He must rise again. Therefore He rather dwells on the difficulties, and enlarges His discourse, that He may open their mind, and they may understand what it can be that He speaks of.

“But they understood not, but the saying was hid from them, and they feared to ask this;” not whether He should die, but how, and in what manner, and what this mystery could be. For they did not even know what was this same rising again, and supposed it much better not to die. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And observe that it is not said,’ He began to say,’ or ’to teach,’ but to show; for as things are said to be shown to the sense, so the things which Christ spake are said to be shown by Him. Nor indeed do I think, that to those who saw Him suffering many things in the flesh, were those things which they saw so shown as this representation in words showed to the disciples the mystery of the passion and resurrection of Christ. At that time, indeed, He only began to show them, and afterwards when they were more able to receive it, He showed them more fully; for all that Jesus began to do, that He accomplished. He must needs go to Jerusalem, to be put to death indeed in the Jerusalem which is below, but to rise again and reign in the heavenly Jerusalem. But when Christ rose again, and others were risen with Him, they no longer sought the Jerusalem which is beneath, or the house of prayer in it, but that which is above. He suffers many things from the elders of the earthly Jerusalem, that He may be glorified by those heavenly elders who receive His mercies. He rose again from the dead on the third day, that He may deliver from the evil one, and purchase for such as are so delivered this gift, that they be baptized in spirit, soul, and body, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, who are three days perpetually present to those that through them have been made children of light. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theophylact of Ohrid: . To them He foretells the Passion, lest it come upon them unexpectedly and they be scandalized, thinking that He suffered unwillingly and without foreknowing it. When they had heard, in Peter’s confession, that He was the Son of God, then He also revealed the Passion to them. But to the sorrow He adds the joy, that He would rise on the third day.

Matthew 16:22

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Lord, knowing the suggestion of the craft of the devil, says to Peter, Get thee behind me; that is, that he should follow the example of His passion; but to him by whom this expression was suggested, He turns and says, Satan, thou art an offence unto me. For we cannot suppose that the name of Satan, and the sin of being an offence, would be imputed to Peter after those so great declarations of blessedness and power that had been granted him. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): We have often said that Peter had too hot a zeal, and a very great affection towards the Lord the Saviour. Therefore after that his confession, and the reward of which he had heard from the Saviour, he would not have that his confession destroyed, and thought it impossible that the Son of God could be put to death, but takes Him to him affectionately, or takes Him aside that he may not seem to be rebuking his Master in the presence of his fellow disciples, and begins to chide Him with the feeling of one that loved Him, and to contradict Him, and say, Be it far from thee, Lord; or as it is better in the Greek, ἵλεώς σοι Κύριε, οὐ μὴ ἔσται σοι τοῦτο, that is, Be propitious to Thyself, Lord, this shall not be unto Thee.

But to me this error of the Apostle, proceeding from the warmth of his affection, will never seem a suggestion of the devil. Let the thoughtful reader consider that that blessedness of power was promised to Peter in time to come, not given him at the time present; had it been conveyed to him immediately, the error of a false confession would never have found place in him.

As much as to say; It is of My will, and of the Father’s will, that I should die for the salvation of men; you considering only your own will would not that the grain of wheat should fall into the ground, that it may bring forth much fruit; therefore as you speak what is opposed to My will, you ought to be called My adversary. For Satan is interpreted ‘adverse’ or ‘contrary.’ — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 22, 23.) And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, be it far from you, this shall not happen to you. But he turned and said to Peter: Get behind me, Satan, you are a hindrance to me, for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man. We have often said that Peter had great zeal and love for the Lord Savior. Therefore, after his confession, when he said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God, and heard the Savior’s response: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven, he suddenly hears from the Lord that he must go to Jerusalem, suffer many things from the elders and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day rise again. He does not want his confession to be destroyed; he does not think it is possible for the Son of God to be killed. And he takes him into his affection, or leads him separately, so that he does not appear to accuse the teacher in front of the other disciples, and he begins to rebuke him out of love and desire, saying: Lord, be it far from you; or as it is better in Greek, ἵλεώς σοι, Κύριε, οὐ μὴ ἔσται σοι τοῦτο, which means, be propitious to yourself, Lord, this shall not happen to you; it cannot happen, and my ears do not accept that the Son of God should be killed. To whom the Lord, turning, said: Go behind me, Satan, you are a stumbling block to me. Satan is interpreted as adversary or opposer. Because you speak contrary to my will, you must be called adversary. Many believe that it was not Peter who was rebuked, but the opposing spirit who suggested these words to the Apostle. But to me, this Apostolic error, coming from a feeling of piety, will never seem like an incentive of the devil: Go behind me, Satan. The devil says: Go away. Peter hears: Go away from me, that is, follow my opinion: for you do not understand the things that are of God, but those that are of men. It is my will, and the Father’s (whose will I have come to do (John VI)) that I should die for the salvation of men, while you, considering only your own will, do not want a grain of wheat to fall to the ground, so that it may bring forth many fruits (John XII). Let the wise reader inquire how, after such great blessedness: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona; and: You are Peter; and on this rock I will build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and: Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; now let him hear: Go away from me, Satan, you are a stumbling block to me? But what kind of sudden conversion is this, that after so great rewards, he is called Satan? But if he considers who is asking this, he will understand that Peter received that blessing and beatitude, and power, and edification upon the Church, promised for the future, not given in the present. I will build, he says, my Church upon you and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. All these things are for the future, which if he had immediately given them to him, the error of wrong opinion would have never found a place in him. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For what wonder is it that this should befal Peter, who had never received a revelation concerning these things? For that you may learn that that confession which he made concerning Christ was not spoken of himself, observe how in these things which had not been revealed to him, he is at a loss. Estimating the things of Christ by human and earthly principles, he judged it mean and unworthy of Him that He should suffer. Therefore the Lord added, For thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Therefore, the rest being troubled and in perplexity, Peter again, in his ardor, alone ventures to discourse of these things; and not even he openly, but when he had taken Him apart; that is, having separated himself from the rest of the disciples; and he saith, “Be it far from Thee, Lord, this shall not be unto Thee.” What ever is this? He that obtained a revelation, he that was blessed, hath he so soon fallen away, and suffered overthrow, so as to fear His passion? And what marvel, that one who had not on these points received any revelation, should have that feeling? Yea, to inform thee that not of himself did he speak those other things either, see in these matters that were not revealed to him how he is confounded and overthrown, and being told ten thousand times, knows not what the saying can mean.

For that He is Son of God he had learnt, but what the mystery of the cross and of the resurrection might be, was not yet manifest to him: for “the saying,” it is said, “was hid from them.”

Seest thou that with just cause He bade them not declare it to the rest? For if it so confounded them, who must needs be made aware of it, what would not all others have felt? — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 54

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And observe that it is not said,’ He began to say,’ or ’to teach,’ but to show; for as things are said to be shown to the sense, so the things which Christ spake are said to be shown by Him. Nor indeed do I think, that to those who saw Him suffering many things in the flesh, were those things which they saw so shown as this representation in words showed to the disciples the mystery of the passion and resurrection of Christ. At that time, indeed, He only began to show them, and afterwards when they were more able to receive it, He showed them more fully; for all that Jesus began to do, that He accomplished. He must needs go to Jerusalem, to be put to death indeed in the Jerusalem which is below, but to rise again and reign in the heavenly Jerusalem. But when Christ rose again, and others were risen with Him, they no longer sought the Jerusalem which is beneath, or the house of prayer in it, but that which is above. He suffers many things from the elders of the earthly Jerusalem, that He may be glorified by those heavenly elders who receive His mercies. He rose again from the dead on the third day, that He may deliver from the evil one, and purchase for such as are so delivered this gift, that they be baptized in spirit, soul, and body, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, who are three days perpetually present to those that through them have been made children of light.

While Christ was yet speaking the beginnings of the things which He was showing unto them, Peter considered them unworthy of the Son of the living God. And forgetting that the Son of the living God does nothing, and acts in no way worthy of blame, he began to rebuke Him; and this is what is said, And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.

As though Christ Himself had needed a propitiation. His affection Christ allows, but charges him with ignorance; as it follows, He turned and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan, thou art an offence unto me.

Yet the words in which Peter and those in which Satan are rebuked, are not, as is commonly thought, the same; to Peter it is said, Get thee behind me, Satan; that is, follow me, thou that art contrary to my will; to the Devil it is said, Go thy way, Satan, understanding not ‘behind me,’ but ‘into everlasting fire.’ He said therefore to Peter, Get thee behind me, as to one who through ignorance was ceasing to walk after Christ. And He called him Satan, as one, who through ignorance had somewhat contrary to God. But he is blessed to whom Christ turns, even though He turn in order to rebuke him. But why said He to Peter, Thou art an offence unto me, (Ps. 119:165.) when in the Psalm it is said, Great peace have they that love thy law, and there is no offence to them? It must be answered, that not only is Jesus not offended, but neither is any man who is perfect in the love of God; and yet he who does or speaks any thing of the nature of an offence, may be an offence even to one who is incapable of being offended. Or he may hold every disciple that sinneth as an offence, as Paul speaks, Who is offended, and I burn not?. (2 Cor. 11:29.) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theophylact of Ohrid: Peter rightly confessed what had been revealed; in what had not been revealed, he erred: that we may learn that Peter did not utter that great truth without God’s help. Not wanting Christ to suffer, and being ignorant of the mystery of the Resurrection, Peter said, “Be it far from Thee, Lord, this shall not be unto Thee.”

Matthew 16:23

Origen of Alexandria: What he intended when he forbade them to publicly declare him Christ is clarified in part by “From that time Jesus began to show his disciples how he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders” and the following thoughts. At the right time and in the right way, he proclaimed to those who knew that Jesus was Christ, Son of the living God (the Father had revealed this to them), that rather than believing in Jesus Christ already crucified, they should believe in Jesus Christ soon to be crucified. So also, instead of believing in Jesus Christ already risen from the dead, they should believe in “Jesus Christ soon to be raised from the dead.”“Having put off from himself the principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in the cross.” If anyone is ashamed of the cross of Christ, he is ashamed of the agency by which these powers were defeated. The one who both believes and is assured of these things should, more appropriately, glory in the cross of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Through that cross, when Christ was crucified, the principalities (among them, I think, was also the prince of this world) were publicly humiliated and paraded before the eyes of the believing world. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.18

Origen of Alexandria: Responding to Peter’s ignorance as one opposing God, Jesus said, “Satan,” which is Hebrew for opponent. If he had not spoken to him from ignorance nor of the living God when he said, “Never, Lord! This must never happen to you!” then he would not have said to him “Get behind me,” as if speaking to someone who had given up being behind him and following him. Neither would he have called him “Satan.” Satan had overpowered the one following Jesus in order to turn him aside from following him and from being behind the Son of God, to make him, because of ignorant words, worthy of being called “Satan” and a scandal to the Son of God, “not thinking in the ways of God but of humans.” — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.21

Tertullian: And if even then a Prodicus or Valentinus stood by, suggesting that one must not confess on the earth before men, and must do so the less in truth, that God may not (seem to) thirst for blood, and Christ for a repayment of suffering, as though He besought it with the view of obtaining salvation by it for Himself also, he would have immediately heard from the servant of God what the devil had from the Lord: “Get thee behind me, Satan; thou art an offence unto me. It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.” But even now it will be right that he hear it, seeing that, long after, he has poured forth these poisons, which not even thus are to injure readily any of the weak ones, if any one in faith will drink, before being hurt, or even immediately after, this draught of ours. — Scorpiace

Theodore Stratelates: When, contrary to what he had hoped, Peter heard this, he was troubled. For the revelation had exhibited Christ as Son of God and the living God, on the one hand. Yet on the other hand, he was found to be preparing for the dreadful events of the Passion. In rebuking Peter, Christ brings to light his own righteous judgment. When Peter confessed Christ, Christ praised him. But when he was irrationally terrified, Christ rebuked him, acting without respect of persons. — FRAGMENT 102

Theophylact of Ohrid: . When Peter spoke rightly, Christ called him blessed, but when he was irrationally dismayed, and did not want Him to suffer, then Christ rebuked him and said, “Get thee behind Me, Satan.” “Satan” means “the adversary.” “Get thee behind Me,” that is, do not oppose Me, but follow My will. He calls Peter this because Satan, too, did not wish Christ to suffer. What He is saying, then, is this: with human reasoning you think that suffering does not befit Me, but you fail to understand that by this means God is accomplishing salvation and that this, on the contrary, greatly befits Me.

Matthew 16:24

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. in Ev. xxxii. 2.) For unless a man departs from himself, he does not draw near to Him who is above him. But if we leave ourselves, whither shall we go out of ourselves? Or if we have forsaken ourselves, who is it then that goes? Indeed, we are one thing when fallen by sin, another thing as we were made by nature. It is therefore then that we leave and deny ourselves, when we avoid that which we were of old, and strive towards that to which we are called in newness.

(in Ezech. Hom. i. 10.) He denies himself whosoever is changed for the better, and begins to be what he was not, and ceases to be what he was.

(Mor. xxxiii. 6.) He also denies himself, who having trode under foot the risings of pride, shows himself in the eyes of God to be estranged from himself.

(Hom. in Ev. xxxii. 3.) There are two ways of taking our cross; when the body is afflicted by abstinence, or when the heart is pained by compassion for another. Forasmuch as our very virtues are beset with faults, we must declare that vainglory sometimes attends abstinence of flesh, for the emaciated body and pale countenance betray this high virtue to the praise of the world. Compassion again is sometimes attended by a false affection, which is hereby led to be consenting unto sin; to shut out these, He adds, and follow me. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist: Because our Lord and Redeemer came into the world as a new man, he gave new precepts to the world. For he set the newness of himself in opposition to our old life nourished in vices. For what did the old, what did the carnal man know except to hold onto his own things, to seize what belongs to others if he could, or to covet them if he could not? But the heavenly physician applies remedies that counteract each and every vice. For just as in the art of medicine hot things are cured by cold and cold things by hot, so our Lord set forth teachings contrary to sins, so that he might command continence to the unchaste, generosity to the greedy, gentleness to the wrathful, and humility to the proud. Certainly when he set forth new commandments to those following him, he said: “Unless someone renounces all that he possesses, he cannot be my disciple.” As if he were saying openly: You who through your old life covet what belongs to others, through the pursuit of a new way of life give away even your own things. But let us hear what he says in this reading: “Whoever wishes to come after me, let him deny himself.” There it is said that we should deny our possessions; here it is said that we should deny ourselves. And perhaps it is not difficult for a person to leave behind his possessions, but it is very difficult to leave behind himself. For it is a lesser thing to deny what one has, but it is a very great thing to deny what one is.

To those coming to him, the Lord commanded that we renounce our possessions, because all of us who come to the contest of faith take up a struggle against evil spirits. But evil spirits possess nothing of their own in this world. Therefore we must wrestle naked against those who are naked. For if someone clothed wrestles with someone naked, he is thrown to the ground more quickly because he has something by which he can be seized. For what are all earthly things except certain garments of the body? Therefore, whoever hastens to the contest against the devil should cast off his garments lest he be overcome. Let him possess nothing in this world by loving it; let him seek no pleasures of passing things, lest where he is covered according to his wish, he be seized for his fall from that very thing. Yet it is not enough to leave behind our possessions unless we also leave behind ourselves. What is it that we are saying: “Let us also leave behind ourselves”? For if we leave ourselves behind, where shall we go outside of ourselves? Or who is it that goes if he has abandoned himself? But we are one thing having fallen through sin, another thing as created by nature; one thing is what we have made ourselves, another is what we were made. Let us leave behind ourselves as we made ourselves by sinning, and let us remain ourselves as we were made through grace. For behold, if someone who was proud, having been converted to Christ, has become humble, he has left himself behind. If any lustful person has changed his life to continence, he has certainly denied what he was. If any greedy person has now ceased to grasp at things and has learned to give away his own possessions who previously seized what belonged to others, without doubt he has left himself behind. He himself indeed remains by nature, but he is not himself by malice. For thus it is written: “Turn the wicked, and they shall not be.” For the wicked when converted shall not be—not because they shall not exist at all in essence, but surely they shall not be in the guilt of wickedness. Therefore we leave ourselves behind, we deny ourselves, when we avoid what we were through oldness and strive toward that to which we are called through newness. Let us consider how Paul had denied himself, who said: “Yet I live, now not I.” For that savage persecutor had been extinguished, and the devout preacher had begun to live. For if he himself were still that same person, he would certainly not be devout. But let him who denies that he lives say from where it is that he proclaims holy words through the teaching of truth. He immediately adds: “But Christ lives in me.” As if he were saying openly: I indeed have been extinguished from myself because I do not live carnally; yet I have not died essentially because I live spiritually in Christ. Therefore let the Truth speak, let him say: “If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself.” Because unless someone falls away from himself, he does not draw near to him who is above himself; nor is he able to grasp what is beyond himself if he does not know how to sacrifice what he is. So seedlings of vegetables are transplanted so that they may flourish, and, if I may say so, they are uprooted so that they may grow. So seeds of things perish when mixed with the earth, so that in the renewal of their kind they may rise up more abundantly. For from where they seem to have lost what they were, from there they receive the ability to appear as what they were not.

But he who now denies himself from vices must seek out the virtues in which he may grow. For when it was said: “Whoever wishes to come after me, let him deny himself,” it is immediately added: “And let him take up his cross, and follow me.” For the cross is taken up in two ways: either when the body is afflicted through abstinence, or when the mind is troubled through compassion for one’s neighbor. Let us consider how Paul had borne his cross in both ways, who said: “I chastise my body and bring it into subjection, lest perhaps while preaching to others I myself should become a castaway.” Behold, in the affliction of the body we have heard of the cross of the flesh; let us now hear of the cross of the mind in compassion for one’s neighbor. For he says: “Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is scandalized, and I am not on fire?” Indeed the perfect preacher, in order to give an example of abstinence, carried the cross in his body. And because he drew upon himself the losses of another’s weakness, he carried the cross in his heart.

But because certain vices lie close to these very virtues, we must explain which vice besieges abstinence of the flesh and which besieges compassion of the mind. For vainglory often besieges abstinence of the flesh from nearby, because when thinness in the body and pallor in the face are observed, the revealed virtue is praised; and it pours itself outward all the more quickly, the more it appears to human eyes through the display of pallor. And it often happens that what is believed to be done for God’s sake is done solely for human approval. This is well signified by that Simon who, found on the road, carries the Lord’s cross under compulsion. For burdens belonging to another are carried under compulsion when something is done through the pursuit of vanity. Who then are designated by Simon, if not the abstinent and arrogant? They indeed afflict the flesh through abstinence, but they do not seek the fruit of abstinence within. Therefore Simon carries the Lord’s cross under compulsion, because when he is not led to a good work by good will, a sinner performs the deed of a just man without fruit. Hence the same Simon carries the cross but does not die, because the abstinent and arrogant indeed afflict the body through abstinence, but through the desire for glory they live to the world. False piety, however, often secretly besieges compassion of the soul, so that it sometimes drags it down even to condoning vices, whereas one ought not to exercise compassion toward faults, but zeal. For compassion is owed to the person, and rectitude to the vices, so that in one and the same person we both love the good that he was made and pursue the evils that he has done, lest while we carelessly remit faults, we seem not to have shown compassion through charity, but to have fallen through negligence. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 32

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): We are to follow our Lord by taking up the cross of His passion; and if not in deed, yet in will, hear Him company. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Otherwise; He takes up his cross who is crucified to the world; and he to whom the world is crucified, follows his crucified Lord. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Vers. 24 seqq.) Then Jesus said to his disciples: If anyone wants to come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his own soul? Whoever puts off the old man with his works (Colossians 3), denies himself, saying: Now I live, but Christ lives in me (Galatians 2:20): and he takes up his cross and is crucified to the world. But the one to whom the world was crucified follows the crucified Lord.

But what exchange will a man give for his soul? For Israel, Egypt and Ethiopia are given in exchange, and Syene (Isaiah XLIII, 3, 4): for the human soul, that alone is the retribution, which the Psalmist sings: What shall I render to the Lord for all that He has rendered to me? I will take the cup of salvation, and will invoke the name of the Lord (Psalm CXV, 3). — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome: Whose sense what is written in the Gospel of Matthew: If anyone wants to come after me, let him deny himself (Matth. 16. 24). What is self-denial? or how does one who follows the Savior deny himself? On this matter I have spoken briefly in the third book of his commentary on Matthew: He who lays down the old man with his works denies himself, saying: And yet I live, but not me, but Christ lives in me (Galatians 2:20) and takes up his cross and is crucified to the world. But who has crucified the world, follows the crucified Lord. “To whom we can now add: after he showed the disciples that it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the priests and scribes, and the chief priests, and to be killed; Peter, taking him aside, began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, may this never happen to you. But he turned and said to Peter: Get behind me, Satan, you are a stumbling block to me; for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of men.” (Matthew 16:21-23) For, indeed, being terrified by human fear, he was afraid of the passion of the Lord. And just as, hearing he must suffer and be killed, he was afraid, so hearing, also, that he must rise again on the third day, he ought to have rejoiced, and the sadness of the passion mitigated by the glory of the resurrection. So, when this thought had seized him through fear, he spoke to all the disciples, or, according to Mark, he called the crowd with his disciples, or according to Luke, he spoke to all: “If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself; and let him take up his cross, and follow me.” The meaning of this exhortation is: Confession is not delicate and secure in God. Whoever believes in me should shed his own blood. Whoever shall have lost his life in this world, shall save it in the next. Believing in Christ every day, one takes up their cross and denies themselves. Whoever was impure, turns towards chastity, temperance denying luxury. Whoever was fearful and timid, assumes the strength of courage, not knowing who they were. If the unjust follow justice, they deny injustice. If foolish, confessing Christ as God’s power and wisdom, they deny foolishness (1 Corinthians 1). Knowing this, we deny ourselves what we were before not only in times of persecution and the necessity of martyrdom, but in every conversation, action, thought, and speech; and we confess that we are reborn in Christ. For this reason, the Lord was crucified so that we, who believe in him and have died to sin, are crucified with him, and we say what the Apostle Paul taught: I am crucified with Christ. (Galatians 2:19). And: But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ; by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world (Galatians 6:14). And he that is crucified with Christ, shall spoil principalities and powers; and he shall triumph over them in himself. Wherefore, in the Gospel according to Matthew, Simon of Cyrene bore the cross after him, as a type of those who were to believe in him, and to be crucified with him; which cross, according to the others, he bore himself at first. — Letter 121, Chapter 3

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. lv.) Peter had said, Be it far from thee, Lord, this shall not be unto thee; and had been answered, Get thee behind me, Satan; but the Lord was not satisfied with this rebuke, but over and above desired to show the impropriety of those things which Peter had said, and the fruit of His own passion; whence it is added, Then said Jesus to his disciples, If any man will to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me; as much as to say, You say unto me, Be it far from thee; but I say unto you, that not only is it harmful for you to hinder Me from My Passion, but yourself will not be able to be saved unless you suffer and die, and renounce your life always. And note, that He does not speak of it as compulsory, for He does not say, Though ye will not yet must ye suffer this, but, If any man will. By saying this He rather attracted them; for he who leaves his auditor at liberty, attracts him the more; whereas he that uses violence oftentimes hinders him. And He proposes this doctrine, not to His disciples only, but in common to the whole world, saying, If any man will, that is, if woman, if man, if king, if free, if slave; there are three things mentioned; let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.

Otherwise; He that disowns another, whether a brother, or a servant, or whosoever it be, he may see him beaten, or suffering aught else, and neither succours nor befriends him; thus it is he would have us deny our body, and whether it be beaten or afflicted in any other way, not to spare it. For this is to spare. So parents do then most spare their children when they hand them over to tutors, bidding them not to spare them. And that you should not think that this denial of self extends only to words or affronts, he shows to what degree we should deny ourselves, namely, to death the most shameful, even that of the cross; this He signifies when He says, And take up his cross, and follow me.

And because malefactors often suffer grievous things, that you should not suppose that simply to suffer evil is enough, He adds the reason of suffering, when He says, And follow me. For His sake you are to endure all, and to learn His other virtues; for this is to follow Christ aright, to be diligent in the practice of virtues, and to suffer all things for His sake.

And then because this seemed severe, He softens it by showing the abundant rewards of our pains, and the punishment of evil, He that will save his life shall lose it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Then; when? When Peter said, “Be it far from Thee, this shall not be unto Thee;” and was told, “Get thee behind me, Satan.” For He was by no means satisfied with the mere rebuke, but, willing also more abundantly to show both the extravagance of what Peter had said, and the benefit of His passion, He saith, “Thy word to me is, ‘Be it far from Thee, this shall not be unto Thee:’ but my word to thee is, ‘Not only is it hurtful to thee, and destructive, to hinder me and to be displeased at my Passion, but it will be impossible for thee even to be saved, unless thou thyself too be continually prepared for death.’”

Thus, lest they should think His suffering unworthy of Him, not by the former things only, but also by the events that were coming on, He teaches them the gain thereof. Thus in John first, He saith, “Except the corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit;” but here more abundantly working it out, not concerning Himself only doth He bring forward the statement that it is meet to die, but concerning them also. “For so great is the profit thereof, that in your case also unwillingness to die is grievous, but to be ready for it, good.”

This however He makes clear by what follows, but for the present He works it out on one side only. And see how He also makes His discourse unexceptionable: not saying at all, “whether you will, or no, you must suffer this,” but how? “If any man will come after me.” “I force not, I compel not, but each one I make lord of his own choice; wherefore also I say, ‘If any man will.’ For to good things do I call you, not to things evil, or burdensome; not to punishment and vengeance, that I should have to compel. Nay, the nature of the thing is alone sufficient to attract you.”

Now, thus saying, He drew them unto Him the more. For he indeed that uses compulsion often turns men away, but he that leaves the hearer to choose attracts him more. For soothing is a mightier thing than force. Wherefore even He Himself said, “If any man will.” “For great,” saith He, “are the good things which I give you, and such as for men even to run to them of their own accord. For neither if one were giving gold, and offering a treasure, would he invite with force. And if that invitation be without compulsion, much more this, to the good things in the Heavens. Since if the nature of the thing persuade thee not to run, thou art not worthy to receive it at all, nor if thou shouldest receive it, wilt thou well know what thou hast received.”

Wherefore Christ compels not, but urges, sparing us. For since they seemed to be murmuring much, being secretly disturbed at the saying, He saith, “No need of disturbance or of trouble. If ye do not account what I have mentioned to be a cause of innumerable blessings, even when befalling yourselves, I use no force, nor do I compel, but if any be willing to follow, him I call.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 55

John Chrysostom: And though he seem to have spoken but one single thing, yet His sayings are three, “Let him renounce himself,” and “Let him bear his cross,” and “Let him follow me;” and two of them are joined together, but the one is put by itself.

But let us see first what it can be to deny one’s self. Let us learn first what it is to deny another, and then we shall know what it may be to deny one’s self. What then is it to deny another? He that is denying another,-for example, either brother, or servant, or whom you will,-should he see him either beaten, or bound, or led to execution, or whatever he may suffer, stands not by him, doth not help him, is not moved, feels nothing for him, as being once for all alienated from him. Thus then He will have us disregard our own body, so that whether men scourge, or banish, or burn, or whatever they do, we may not spare it. For this is to spare it. Since fathers too then spare their offspring, when committing them to teachers, they command not to spare them.

So also Christ; He said not, “Let him not spare himself,” but very strictly, “Let him renounce himself;” that is, let him have nothing to do with himself, but give himself up to all dangers and conflicts; and let him so feel, as though another were suffering it all.

And He said not, “Let him deny,” but “Let him renounce;” even by this small addition intimating again, how very far it goes. For this latter is more than the former.

“And let him take up his cross.” This arises out of the other. For to hinder thy supposing that words, and insults, and reproaches are to be the limits of our self-renunciation, He saith also how far one ought to renounce one’s self; that is, unto death, and that a reproachful death. Therefore He said not, “Let him renounce himself unto death,” but, “Let him take up his cross;” setting forth the reproachful death; and that not once, nor twice, but throughout all life one ought so to do. “Yea,” saith He, “bear about this death continually, and day by day be ready for slaughter. For since many have indeed contemned riches, and pleasure, and glory, but death they despised not, but feared dangers; I,” saith He, “will that my champion should wrestle even unto blood, and that the limits of his course should reach unto slaughter; so that although one must undergo death, death with reproach, the accursed death, and that upon evil surmise, we are to bear all things nobly, and rather to rejoice in being suspected.”

“And let him follow me.” That is, it being possible for one to suffer, yet not to follow Him, when one doth not suffer for Him (for so robbers often suffer grievously, and violators of tombs, and sorcerers); to hinder thy supposing that the mere nature of thy calamities is sufficient, He adds the occasion of these calamities.

And what is it? In order that, so doing and suffering, thou mayest follow Him; that for Him thou mayest undergo all things; that thou mayest possess the other virtues also. For this too is expressed by “Let him follow me;” so as to show forth not fortitude only, such as is exercised in our calamities, but temperance also, and moderation, and all self-restraint. This being properly “to follow,” the giving heed also to the other virtues, and for His sake suffering all.

For there are who follow the devil even to the endurance of all this, and for his sake give up their own lives; but we for Christ, or rather for our own sakes: they indeed to harm themselves both here and there; but we, that we may gain both lives.

How then is it not extreme dullness, not to show forth even the same fortitude with them that perish; and this, when we are to reap from it so many crowns? Yet with us surely Christ Himself is present to be our help, but with them no one. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 55

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Yet the words in which Peter and those in which Satan are rebuked, are not, as is commonly thought, the same; to Peter it is said, Get thee behind me, Satan; that is, follow me, thou that art contrary to my will; to the Devil it is said, Go thy way, Satan, understanding not ‘behind me,’ but ‘into everlasting fire.’ He said therefore to Peter, Get thee behind me, as to one who through ignorance was ceasing to walk after Christ. And He called him Satan, as one, who through ignorance had somewhat contrary to God. But he is blessed to whom Christ turns, even though He turn in order to rebuke him. But why said He to Peter, Thou art an offence unto me, (Ps. 119:165.) when in the Psalm it is said, Great peace have they that love thy law, and there is no offence to them? It must be answered, that not only is Jesus not offended, but neither is any man who is perfect in the love of God; and yet he who does or speaks any thing of the nature of an offence, may be an offence even to one who is incapable of being offended. Or he may hold every disciple that sinneth as an offence, as Paul speaks, Who is offended, and I burn not?. (2 Cor. 11:29.)

But though a man may seem to keep from sin, yet if he does not believe in the cross of Christ, he cannot be said to be crucified with Christ; whence it follows, And take up his cross. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: If you wish to be the Lord’s disciple, it is necessary you “take your cross, and follow the Lord: " your cross; that is, your own straits and tortures, or your body only, which is after the manner of a cross. — On Idolatry

Tertullian: Observe, then, the difference between a heathen and a Christian in their death: if you have to lay down your life for God, as the Comforter counsels, it is not in gentle fevers and on soft beds, but in the sharp pains of martyrdom: you must take up the cross and bear it after your Master, as He has Himself instructed you. The sole key to unlock Paradise is your own life’s blood. — A Treatise on the Soul

Theophylact of Ohrid: “Then” — when? When He had rebuked Peter. Wishing to show that Peter erred in hindering Him from suffering, He said, “You are hindering Me, but I say to you that not only is My not suffering harmful to you [since without it you cannot be saved], but neither can you be saved unless you yourself also die, nor can anyone else, whether man or woman, rich or poor. He says “desireth’’ to show that virtue hinges on free will and not coercion. He who follows behind Jesus is not he who only confesses Him to be the Son of God, but rather it is he who also undergoes all tribulations and endures them. Christ’s words, “Let him deny himself,” indicate utter denial. That is to say, let him not be kindly disposed towards his own body, let him look down on it, just as we have the expression “So and so denied so and so.” Therefore no one should have any friendship towards the body, so that he can take up his cross, that is, choose death and even eagerly desire the most ignominious death, for this is what the cross meant to the ancients. But He also said, “Let him follow Me, for many robbers and thieves are crucified but they are not My disciples.” So “let him follow,” that is, let him also show forth every other virtue. The one who yesterday was dissolute denies himself and today he is temperate. Such was Paul who had denied himself when he said, “I live yet it is no longer I, but Christ that liveth in me” (Gal. 2:20). He that has mortified and crucified himself to the world is he that takes up his cross.

Matthew 16:25

Desert Fathers: Evagrius said, ‘To go against self is the beginning of salvation.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Gregory the Dialogist: For he that will save his life shall lose it; and he that shall lose his life for my sake shall find it. Thus it is said to the faithful: He that will save his life shall lose it; and he that shall lose his life for my sake shall save it. As if it were said to the farmer: If you keep your grain, you lose it; if you sow it, you renew it. For who does not know that when grain is cast as seed, it perishes from sight, it fails in the earth? But from where it rots in the dust, from there it springs up green in renewal. Because indeed the holy Church has one time of persecution and another of peace, our Redeemer distinguishes these very times in his precepts. For in time of persecution life must be laid down, but in time of peace those earthly desires that can more readily dominate must be broken. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 32

John Chrysostom: Then, because the saying seemed to be vehement, see how He softens it by what follows, and sets down rewards surpassing our toils; and not rewards only, but also the penalties of vice: nay, on these last He dwells more than on those, since not so much His bestowing blessings, as His threat of severities, is wont to bring ordinary men to their senses. See at least how He both begins here from this, and ends in this.

“For whosoever will save his life shall lose it,” saith He, “but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.”

Now what He saith is like this: “not as unsparing towards you, but rather as exceedingly sparing you, I enjoin these things. For he who spares his child, ruins it; but he who spares it not, preserves.” To which effect also a certain wise man said, “If thou beat thy son with a rod, he shall not die, but thou shall deliver his soul from death.” And again, “He that refresheth his son, shall bind up his wounds.”

This takes place in the camp also. For if the general, sparing the soldiers, commands them to remain within the place always, he will destroy with them the inhabitants too.

“In order then that this may not happen in your case also,” saith He, “ye must be arrayed against continual death. For now too a grievous war is about to be kindled. Sit not therefore within, but go forth and fight; and shouldest thou fall in thy post, then hast thou obtained life.” For if in the visible wars he that in his post meets slaughter, is both more distinguished than the rest, and more invincible, and more formidable to the enemy; although we know that after death the king, in behalf of whom he takes his station, is not able to raise him up again: much more in these wars, when there are such hopes of resurrection besides, will he who exposes his own life unto death, find it; in one sense, because he will not be quickly taken; in a second, because even though he fall, God will lead his life on to a higher life. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 55

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): This may be understood in two ways. First thus; if any lover of this present life spares his life, fearing to die, and supposing that his life is ended with this death; he seeking in this way to save his life, shall lose it, estranging it from life eternal. But if any, despising the present life, shall contend for the truth unto death, he shall lose his life as far as this present life is concerned, but forasmuch as he loses it for Christ, he shall the more save it for life eternal. Otherwise thus; if any understand what is true salvation, and desire to obtain it for the salvation of his own life, he by denying himself loses his life as to the enjoyments of the flesh, but saves it by works of piety. He shows by saying. For he that will, that this passage must be connected in sense with that which went before. If then we understand the first, Let him deny himself, of the death of the body, we must take this that follows of death only; but if we understand the first of mortifying the propensities of the flesh, then, to lose his life, signifies to give up carnal pleasures. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theophylact of Ohrid: He exhorts us to confess Christ even at the cost of a martyr’s death. For he who denies Christ, finds his life in the present, that is, he saves his own life, but he also loses it later. But he who confesses Christ as a martyr, loses his life, but for Christ’s sake, and so he “shall find it” incorrupt and eternal.

Matthew 16:26

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. in Ev. xxxii. 4.) Or the connection may be thus; The Holy Church has a period of persecution, and a period of peace; and our Redeemer accordingly distinguishes between these periods in His commands; in time of persecution the life is to be laid down; but in time of peace, those earthly lusts which might gain too great power over us are to be broken through; whence He says, What does it profit a man?

(ubi sup.) Or, by the kingdom of God is meant the present Church, and because some of His disciples were to live so long in the body as to behold the Church of God built up and raised against the glory of this world, this comfortable promise is given them, There be some of them standing here. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist: Hence it is now said: For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his own soul? When persecution from adversaries is absent, the heart must be guarded all the more vigilantly. For in time of peace, because it is permitted to live, it is also pleasing to pursue ambition. This greed is indeed well restrained if the very condition of the one pursuing is carefully considered. For why should he press on to gather, when the one who gathers cannot himself remain? Let each one therefore consider his course, and he will recognize that the little he has can suffice for him. But perhaps he fears that provisions will fail on this journey of life. The short way rebukes our long desires; much is carried in vain when the destination is near. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 32

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Having thus called upon His disciples to deny themselves and take up their cross, the hearers were filled with great terror, therefore these severe tidings are followed by more joyful; For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with the holy Angels. Dost thou fear death? Hear the glory of the triumph. Dost thou dread the cross? Hear the attendance of the Angels.

For there is no difference of Jew or Gentile, man or woman, poor or rich, whore not persons but works are accepted.

But the secret thought of the Apostles might have suffered an offence of this sort; The killings and deaths you speak of as to be now, but the promise of your coming in glory is put off to a long distant time. He that knows secret things therefore, seeing that they might object this, requites a present fear with a present reward, saying, Verily I say unto you, There be some of those standing here that shall not taste death until the Son of Man come in his kingdom. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Because He had said, Whoso will save, shall lose, and whoso will lose shall save, opposing saving to losing, that none should hence conclude that there was any equality between the losing on one side, and the saving on the other, He adds, What does it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of his soul? As though He had said, Say not that he who escapes the dangers which threaten him for Christ’s sake, saves his soul, that is, his temporal life; but add to his temporal life the whole world, and what of all these things will profit a man if his soul perishes for ever? Suppose you should see all your servants in joy, and yourself placed in the greatest evils, what profit would you reap from being their master? Think over this within your own soul, when by the indulgence of the flesh that soul looks for its own destruction,

But if you should reign over the whole world, you would not be able to buy your soul; whence it follows, Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? As much as to say, if you lose goods, you may have it in your power to give other goods to recover them; but if you lose your soul, you can neither give another soul, nor any thing else in ransom for it. And what marvel is it if this happen in the soul, when we see the same happen in the body; for if you should surround a body afflicted with an incurable disease with ten thousand diadems, they would not heal it.

He said not in such glory as is that of the Father, that you might not suppose a difference of glory, but He says, The glory of the Father, that it might be shown to be the same glory. But if the glory is one, it is evident that the substance is one. What then fearest thou, Peter, hearing of death? For then shalt thou see Me in glory. But if I be in glory, so also shall ye be. But in making mention of His glory, He mingleth therewith things terrible, bringing forward the judgment, as it follows, And then shall he render to each man according to his works.

This He said to call to their minds not only the punishment of sinners, but the prizes and crowns of the righteous.

(Hom. lvi.) Willing to show what is that glory in which He shall come hereafter, He revealed it to them in this present life, so far as it was possible for them to receive it, that they might not have sorrow in their Lord’s death.

Therefore He does not reveal the names of those who should ascend into the mount, because the rest would be very desirous to accompany them whither they might look upon the pattern of His glory, and would be grieved as though they were passed over. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: And He indeed spake it, in part to refresh the good, but I ever shudder at hearing it, for I am not of them that are crowned, and I suppose that others also share with us in our fear and anxiety. For whom is this saying not enough to startle, when he hath entered into his own conscience; and to make him shudder, and convince him that we have need of sackcloth, and of prolonged fasting, more than the people of the Ninevites? For not for an overthrow of a city, and the common end, are we concerned, but for eternal punishment, and the fire that is never quenched.

Wherefore also I praise and admire the monks that have occupied the desert places, as for the rest, so for this saying. For they after having made their dinners, or rather after supper (for dinner they know not at any time, because they know that the present time is one of mourning and fasting); after supper then, in saying certain hymns of thanksgiving unto God, they make mention of this expression also. And if ye would hear the very hymns themselves, that ye too may say them continually, I will rehearse to you the whole of that sacred song. The words of it then stand as follows: “Blessed God, who feedest me from my youth up, who givest food to all flesh; fill our hearts with joy and gladness, that always having all sufficiency we may abound unto every good work in Christ Jesus our Lord; with whom be unto Thee glory, honor and might, with the Holy Spirit, forever. Amen. Glory to Thee, O Lord, glory to Thee, O Holy One, glory to Thee. O King, that Thou hast given us meat to make us glad. Fill us with the Holy Ghost, that we may be found well-pleasing before Thee, not being ashamed, when Thou renderest to every man according to his works.”

Now this hymn is in all parts worthy of admiration, but especially the above ending of it. That is, because meals and food are wont to dissipate and weigh down, they put this saying as a kind of bridle upon the soul, at the time of indulgence reminding it of the time of judgment. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 55

John Chrysostom: Then, because he had said, “He who will save shall lose it, but whosoever shall lose shall save it,” and on that side had set salvation and destruction, and on this salvation and destruction; to prevent any one’s imagining the one destruction and salvation to be all the same with the other, and to teach thee plainly that the difference between this salvation and that is as great as between destruction and salvation; from the contraries also He makes an inference once for all to establish these points. “For what is a man profited,” saith He, “if he gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”

Seest thou how the wrongful preservation of it is destruction, and worse than all destruction, as being even past remedy, from the want of anything more to redeem it? For “tell me not this,” saith He, “that he that hath escaped such dangers hath saved his life; but together with his life put also the whole world, yet what profit hath he thereby, if the soul perish?”

For tell me, shouldest thou see thy servants in luxury, and thyself in extreme calamity, wilt thou indeed profit aught by being master? By no means. Make this reckoning then with regard to thy soul also, when the flesh is in luxury and wealth, and she awaiting the destruction to come.

“What shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”

Again, He dwells upon the same point. What? hast thou another soul to give for this soul? saith He. Why, shouldest thou lose money, thou wilt be able to give money; or be it house, or slaves, or any other kind of possession, but for thy soul, if thou lose it, thou wilt have no other soul to give: yea, though thou hadst the world, though thou wast king of the whole earth, thou wouldest not be able, by paying down all earthly goods, with the earth itself, to redeem but one soul.

And what marvel, if it be so with the soul? Since even in the body one may see that so it turns out. Though thou wear ten thousand diadems, but have a body sickly by nature, and incurable, thou wilt not be able, not by giving all thy kingdom, to recover this body, not though thou add innumerable persons, and cities, and goods.

Now thus I bid thee reason with regard to thy soul also; or rather even much more with regard to the soul; and do thou, forsaking all besides, spend all thy care upon it. Do not then while taking thought about the things of others, neglect thyself and thine own things; which now all men do, resembling them that work in the mines. For neither do these receive any profit from this labor, nor from the wealth; but rather great harm, both because they incur fruitless peril, and incur it for other men, reaping no benefit from such their toils and deaths. These even now are objects of imitation to many, who are digging up wealth for others; or rather we are more wretched even than this, inasmuch as hell itself awaits us after these our labors. For they indeed are stayed from those toils by death, but to us death proves a beginning of innumerable evils.

But if thou say, thou hast in thy wealth the fruit of thy toils: show me thy soul gladdened, and then I am persuaded. For of all things in us the soul is chief. And if the body be fattened, while she is pining away, this prosperity is nothing to thee (even as when the handmaiden is glad, the happiness of the maidservant is nothing to her mistress perishing, nor is the fair robe anything compared with the weak flesh); but Christ will say unto thee again, “What shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” on every hand commanding thee to be busied about that, and to take account of it only. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 55

Origen of Alexandria: The first statement is ambiguous. At first it could be taken this way: Someone who loves being alive and thinks the present life is good manages his own life in order to live well according to the flesh, fearing death since by death he loses life. In this way, wanting to save his own life, he will lose it, having removed it beyond the boundaries of blessedness. Yet someone despising the present life because of my teaching and convinced of eternal life, even facing death for the sake of the truth may, because of piety, lose his own life in death. Yet the same one who lost his life because of me will instead save and keep it.We could interpret the saying, however, in another way. If anyone knows what salvation is and wants to save his own life, after bidding farewell to his life, denying himself and taking up his cross and following me, he will, in terms of the world, have lost his life. But, having lost his life for me and my teaching, he will gain in the end this kind of loss, salvation. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 12.26

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): I suppose also that he gains the world who does not deny himself, nor loses Ms own life as to carnal pleasures, and thence suffers the loss of his soul. These two things being set before us, we must rather choose to lose the world, and gain our souls.

And at first sight indeed the ransom of the soul might be supposed to be in his substance, that a man should give his substance to the poor, and so should save his soul. But I suppose that a man has nothing that giving as a ransom for his soul he should deliver it from death. God gave the ransom for the souls of men, namely the precious blood of His Son. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (e Bed. in Luc. 9.) It is of the saints He speaks as tasting death, by whom the death of the body is tasted just as it were sipping, while the life of the soul is, held fast in possession. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): What is here said, therefore, was fulfilled in the three disciples to whom the Lord, when transfigured in the mount, showed the joys of the eternal inheritance; (vid. Bed. in Luc. 9:27.) these saw Him coming in His kingdom, that is, shining in His effulgent radiance, in which, after the judgment passed, He shall be beheld by all the saints. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 16:27

Apostolic Constitutions: For in the last days false prophets shall be multiplied, and such as corrupt the word; and the sheep shall be changed into wolves, and love into hatred: for through the abounding of iniquity the love of many shall wax cold. For men shall hate, and persecute, and betray one another. And then shall appear the deceiver of the world, the enemy of the truth, the prince of lies, [2 Thessalonians 2:3-12] whom the Lord Jesus “shall destroy with the spirit of His mouth, who takes away the wicked with His lips; and many shall be offended at Him. But they that endure to the end, the same shall be saved. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven;” [Isaiah 11:4; Matthew 24:1-51] and afterwards shall be the voice of a trumpet by the archangel; and in that interval shall be the revival of those that were asleep. And then shall the Lord come, and all His saints with Him, with a great concussion above the clouds, with the angels of His power, [Matthew 16:27] in the throne of His kingdom, to condemn the devil, the deceiver of the world, and to render to every one according to his deeds. “Then shall the wicked go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous shall go into life eternal,” [Matthew 25:46] to inherit those things “which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man, such things as God has prepared for them that love Him;” [1 Corinthians 2:9] and they shall rejoice in the kingdom of God, which is in Christ Jesus. — Apostolic Constitutions (Book VII), Section 2, XXXII

Gregory the Dialogist: Often moreover we overcome greed, but there still remains this obstacle: that we hold to the ways of righteousness with too little guardianship of perfection. For often we despise all things that are passing away, yet we are still hindered by the custom of human respect, so that we are not yet able to express in voice the righteousness we preserve in mind; and we neglect the face of God in defense of justice as much as we fear human faces against justice. But to this wound also an appropriate remedy is added when the Lord says: He who shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed when he shall come in his majesty, and that of the Father, and of the holy angels.

But behold, now people say to themselves: We no longer are ashamed of the Lord and His words, because we profess Him with open voice. To these I respond that in this Christian people there are some who confess Christ for the reason that they see everyone else is Christian. For if the name of Christ were not in such great glory today, the holy Church would not have so many who profess Christ. Therefore the voice of profession is not sufficient as proof of faith, when the profession of the generality defends it from shame. Yet there is a way for each person to examine himself, to prove himself truly in the confession of Christ: whether he is no longer ashamed of His name, whether with full strength of mind he has subdued human shame. Certainly in a time of persecution the faithful could be ashamed of being stripped of their possessions, cast down from positions of dignity, afflicted with beatings. But in a time of peace, because these things are absent from our persecutions, there is another way in which we are shown to ourselves. We often fear being despised by our neighbors, we disdain to tolerate verbal injuries; if perhaps a quarrel arises with a neighbor, we are ashamed to make satisfaction first. For the carnal heart, while it seeks the glory of this life, rejects humility. And very often the very person who is angry desires to be reconciled with the one who disagrees with him, but is ashamed to go first to make satisfaction. Let us consider the deeds of the Truth, that we may see where the actions of our depravity lie. For if we are members of the supreme Head, we ought to imitate Him to whom we are joined. For what does Paul, that outstanding preacher, say as an example for our instruction? We are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were exhorting through us; we beseech you for Christ’s sake, be reconciled to God. Behold, by sinning we have created discord between ourselves and God, and yet God first sent His ambassadors to us, so that we ourselves who sinned might come to peace with God when asked. Therefore let human pride be ashamed, let anyone be confounded who does not first make satisfaction to his neighbor, when after our fault, so that we might be reconciled to Him, God Himself who was offended beseeches us through intervening ambassadors. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 32

Jerome: (Verse 27) For the Son of Man is coming in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will repay each according to his deeds. Peter, scandalized by the preaching of the Lord’s death, was rebuked by the Lord’s sentence. The disciples were provoked to deny themselves, take up their cross, and follow their teacher with a willing heart. The great terror of the listeners, and the ability of the chief apostle to instill fear in others, led to sadness followed by joy, and he said: The Son of Man is coming in the glory of His Father with His angels. Fear death, listen to the glory of the triumphant. Fear the cross, listen to the ministries of the angels. And then, it is said, he will repay each according to his works (Rom. X, 12). There is no distinction between Jew and Gentile, man and woman, poor and rich, where not persons, but works are considered. — Commentary on Matthew

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): As much as to say; The Son of Man is now come, but not in glory; for He ought not to have been ordained in His glory to bear our sins; but then He shall come in His glory, when He shall first have made ready His disciples, being made as they are, that He might make them as He is Himself, in the likeness of His glory.

Morally; To those who are nearly brought to the faith, the Word of God wears the form of a servant; but to those that are perfect, He comes in the glory of the Father. His angels are the words of the Prophets, which it is not possible to comprehend spiritually, until the word of Christ has been first spiritually comprehended, and then will their words be seen in like majesty with His. Then will He give of His own glory to every man according to his deeds; for the better each man is in his deeds, so much the more spiritually does he understand Christ and His Prophets. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theophylact of Ohrid: Let us suppose, He says, that you have gained the whole world: what profit is it if your body prospers while your soul suffers ill? That would be as if the lady of the house dressed in tattered rags, while her maidservants were gorgeously arrayed. For in the age to come a man can give nothing in exchange for his soul. Here one can give tears, sighs, and alms, but there, nothing. For it is a Judge who takes no bribes that will receive us, and He judges each one according to his deeds. But He is also awesome and dreadful, and comes in His glory with His angels, not in lowly form.

Matthew 16:28

Cyril of Alexandria: Since the disciples had not yet received power from on high, it was perhaps not unnatural that they should fall occasionally into human weaknesses and, thinking something of this sort, say, “How shall someone deny himself? Or how can someone, by losing his own life, save it?” …Therefore, to lead them away from reasonings of this sort and, so to speak, forge courage anew within them, communicating to them a longing for the glory to come, he says, “There are some standing here,” hinting at Peter and the sons of Zebedee; for these were taken up with him at the transfiguration, which Christ calls “the kingdom,” as demonstrating the ineffability of [his] authority and the immutable nature of [his] kinship with the Father. And in this [saying] he also hints at the importance and the fearfulness of his second coming, showing this coming to be a prelude and, as it were, a confirmation of that. For he will come “in the glory of God, the Father,” not in the humble condition that is commensurate with us. — FRAGMENT 195

Gregory the Dialogist: He continues: “Amen I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” The kingdom of God, dearest brothers, is not always called the coming kingdom in sacred Scripture, but sometimes the present Church is so called. Hence it is written: “The Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of scandal.” In that kingdom, indeed, there will be no scandals, where certainly the reprobate are not admitted. By this example it is understood that in this passage the kingdom of God refers to the present Church. And because some of the disciples were going to live in the body long enough to see the Church of God built and raised up against the glory of this world, it is now said as a consoling promise: “There are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.” But when the Lord was giving such great precepts about the death that must be undergone, what need was there to come suddenly to this promise? If we consider carefully, we recognize with what great dispensation of love this is done. For to the inexperienced disciples something had to be promised even about the present life, so that they could be strengthened more firmly for the future. Thus to the Israelite people, about to be freed from the land of Egypt, the promised land was promised, and when they were to be called to heavenly gifts, they were persuaded by earthly promises. Why was this? So that while there was something they could receive nearby, they might then more faithfully believe what they could hear about from afar. For a carnal people, if they did not receive small things, would not believe in great things. Therefore Almighty God, by granting earthly things, persuades toward heavenly things, so that by receiving what they could see, they might learn to hope for what they could not see at all; and they would become all the more firm regarding invisible things, inasmuch as visible promises supported them toward certainty of hope. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 32

Hilary of Poitiers: The Lord teaches that both deeds and words, and speech and action, equally furnish the faith of our hope. For it might seem that he had imposed a grievous burden upon human infirmity; namely that, when people had begun to have a sense of life by experiencing it, they should let go its enjoyment which is gratifying to their bodies. He taught that they should deny themselves for the sake of themselves—that is, they should not wish to be that which they had once begun to be. These things which are held close are accompanied by the enticements of gratifying joy, but they may lead to a wavering and uncertain hope. Therefore it was necessary by the authority of a real and manifest example that he teach them of the loss of present things and place these in the context of future gains. All of this might seem contrary to the power and perception of current judgment. After he had warned of the cross to be borne and the soul to be ruined and the eternity of life to be exchanged for the loss of the world, he turned toward his disciples and said that some of them would not taste death until they beheld the Son of man in the glory of his own kingdom. Moreover, Jesus himself tasted death and showed the faithful already a taste of death. And so deeds. — Commentary on Matthew 17.1

Jerome: (Verse 28.) Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. He wanted to heal the terror of the apostles with the hope of promised things, saying: The Son of Man is coming in the glory of his Father with his angels. Moreover, with the authority of a judge added: and he will repay each one according to his works. The silent thought of the apostles could bear such a scandal: you now say that killing and death are coming, but what you promise to be present in the glory of the Father with the ministry of angels and the power of a judge, this will be in the future, and will be delayed for a long time. Therefore, foreseeing what the knowers of secret things could object, he counterbalances present fear with present reward. For he says: There are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom; so that the manner in which he will come afterwards may be shown to you at the present time, because of your unbelief. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, There are some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”

Thus, inasmuch as He had discoursed much of dangers and death, and of His own passion, and of the slaughter of the disciples, and had laid on them those severe injunctions; and these were in the present life and at hand, but the good things in hope and expectation: for example, “They save their life who lose it;” “He is coming in the glory of His Father;” “He renders His rewards:” He willing to assure their very sight, and to show what kind of glory that is wherewith He is to come, so far as it was possible for them to learn it; even in their present life He shows and reveals this; that they should not grieve any more, either over their own death, or over that of their Lord, and especially Peter in His sorrow.

And see what He doth. Having discoursed of hell, and of the kingdom (for as well by saying, “He that findeth his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose it for my sake, shall find it;” as by saying, “He shall reward every man according to his works,” He had manifested both of these): having, I say, spoken of both, the kingdom indeed He shows in the vision, but hell not yet.

Why so? Because had they been another kind of people, of a grosser sort, this too would have been necessary; but since they are approved and considerate, He leads them on the gentler way. But not therefore only doth He make this disclosure, but because to Himself also it was far more suitable.

Not however that He passes over this subject either, but in some places He almost brings even before our eyes the very realities of hell; as when He introduces the picture of Lazarus, and mentions him that exacted the hundred pence, and him that was clad in the filthy garments, and others not a few. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 56

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): They that stand where Jesus stands, are they that have the foundations of their souls rested upon Jesus; of whom such as stood firmest are said not to taste death till they see the Word of God; which comes in His kingdom when they see that excellence of God which they cannot see while they are involved in divers sins, which is to taste death, forasmuch as the soul that sinneth, dies. For as life, and the living bread, is He that came down from heaven, so His enemy death is the bread of death. And of these breads there are some that eat but a little, just tasting them, while some eat more abundantly. They that sin neither often, nor greatly, these only taste death; they that have partaken more perfectly of spiritual virtue do not taste it only, but feed ever on the living bread. That He says, Until they see, does not fix any time at which shall be done what had not been done before, but mentions just what is necessary; for he that once sees Him in His glory, shall after that by no means taste death. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims: See Bed. in Luc. 9, 27: What is here said, therefore, was fulfilled in the three disciples to whom the in Lord, when transfigured in the mount, showed the joys of the eternal inheritance; these saw “Him coming in His kingdom,” that is, shining in His effulgent radiance, in which, after the judgment passed, He shall be beheld by all the saints.

Theophylact of Ohrid: . He had said that the Son of Man would come in His glory. So that they would not disbelieve Him, He says “there be some here” who would see, as far as they were able, the glory of the second coming in the Transfiguration. At the same time He shows what great glory will belong to those who suffer for His sake. For as His flesh shone like lightning on that occasion, so in due proportion will the saints shine forth then at His second coming. Here He is hinting at Peter, James and John, whom He took with Him on the mountain and showed them His kingdom, that is, the future condition in which He would come and both He and the righteous would be radiant. He is saying, therefore, “Some of you here shall not die until you have seen Me transfigured.” See, then, that it is those who stand firm in goodness who see Jesus radiantly transfigured, and they are ever advancing in faith and in the commandments.